- From: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
- Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2001 10:35:38 +0000
- To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Cc: Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
At 05:51 PM 11/8/01 -0600, Pat Hayes wrote: >Am I the only person who has no idea what this >normative/descriptive/prescriptive contrast means? As far as I am aware, >RDF is *entirely* descriptive. FWIW, I agree. I can imagine one might define various notions of "schema complete" on top of RDF, but that would not be part of RDF, just a way that some applications may choose to use it. (e.g. require that in a given RDF graph, require that every subject/object have explicitly stated or deducible type information that conforms to explicitly stated or deducible domain/range types of the properties used. I think that one needs to take a "closed world" view to make any sense of such an approach.) Another approach which I suppose *might* be regarded as prescriptive is the way that statements act to limit the interpretations that are models. A datatyping scheme that acts to constrain the allowable interpretations might in turn cause some RDF graphs to be unsatisfiable. #g ------------------------------------------------------------ Graham Klyne MIMEsweeper Group Strategic Research <http://www.mimesweeper.com> <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com> ------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Friday, 9 November 2001 06:16:40 UTC