- From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2001 20:46:51 -0600
- To: Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com
- Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
> > >.... >> >> >This means that, whether a given RDF class denotes both >> >> >a value space and a lexical space, or only a value space, any >> >> >inferences about the valid membership of a given typed value in >> >> >a superordinate class has only to do with value space. >> >> >> >> No. If a class *denotes* a lexical space, then membership in that >> >> lexical space will be relevant, obviously. >> > >> >Relevant when parsing the lexical form and mapping it to a value, >> >yes, but not necessarily relevant to operations taking >> >subClassOf relations into account. >> >> No, really. If a class name denotes a class consisting of lexical >> forms, i.e. if lexical forms are in the class extension, then lexical >> forms are what determine class membership and subClassOf relations. >> It would be the same if you substituted 'chickens' for 'lexical >> forms'. > >I think we're speaking different languages again... (maybe) Yes, forget it. I think I was focussing in on 'denotes' too closely, is all. ... >Right. (Hey! We're beginning to sync... ;-) Incredible. > > >> Now, the question arises, is >> >> that semantic value a string or (say) a number? >> > >> >But the question is irrelevant within the scope of RDF! The >> >representation of the semantic value is undefined. >> >> I am not asking about a representation, but about the value itself, >> the denotation of the representation: what kind of thing does the >> literal mean/refer to/denote. >> >> The question is not irrelevant; it is central to the model theory. >> This entire debate has to eventually get cashed out in a model theory >> for this language. > >Do you mean, does the literal represent a value or a string >that represents the value? Right. >I'd say that it represents the value, within the context of >a data type. Right, I agree that makes sense; but the S/DC proposals don't take that route; they have all literals in the graph just denoting the string that represents the value, and then have a bNode to denote the value. It seems kind of arse-backwards, but I have to admit it sure makes the semantics of literals simpler if they all just represent strings, period. 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 Wednesday, 14 November 2001 21:46:49 UTC