Re: datatypes and MT

>  > I think we need to nail down the handling of simpler cases before getting
>>  too involved in arcane syntax options.  By simpler cases, I mean how are we
>>  to interpret simple RDF like this:
>>
>>     <rdf:Description rdf:about="#me">
>>       <ex:shoeSize>10</ex:shoeSize>
>>     </rdf:Description>
>
>dirt simple:
>
>	<...#me> <...#shoeSize> "10".

No no, wait a minute. You are having your cake and eating it. That 
triple doesn't conform to your proposed idiom; it uses the literal 
label in object position on an arc not labelled with a datatype 
mapping. If you allow this kind of triple and also your bNode idioms, 
you need to somehow connect them. Can we infer one from the other? 
Both ways? If so, the simple idiom (as you have here) is equivalent 
to the extended bnode form, so why do we need the latter? If not, how 
do we manage to establish any kind of inferential connection between 
them?

Pat
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC					(850)434 8903   home
40 South Alcaniz St.			(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola,  FL 32501			(850)202 4440   fax
phayes@ai.uwf.edu 
http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes

Received on Tuesday, 6 November 2001 20:29:33 UTC