- From: <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>
- Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 12:36:55 +0200
- To: jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com
- Cc: Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com, melnik@db.stanford.edu, phayes@ai.uwf.edu, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
> -----Original Message----- > From: ext jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com > [mailto:jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com] > Sent: 16 November, 2001 23:43 > To: Stickler Patrick (NRC/Tampere) > Cc: Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com; melnik@db.stanford.edu; > phayes@ai.uwf.edu; w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > Subject: RE: Answer to the question: What is a "value" to RDF > > > > [...] > > > > Am I the only one to see a conflict here? (though that may > > not be so surprising ;-) > > > > I.e. what is the interpretation of the following knowledge: > > > > x s:age "P12Y" . > > s:age rdfs:range xsd:duration . > > s:age rdfs:subPropertyOf xsd:duration . > > > > According to the S proposal, either range or subproperty > > relations can define type. Which is it going to be? Both?! > > > I think that in the S-idiom it is (just) > > x s:age [ xsd:duration "P12Y"] . By which you mean, in NTriples: x s:age y . y xsd:duration "P12Y" . But that is redundant, since the semantics of xsd:duration have already be infused into the semantics of s:age. With regards to data typing semantics only, you are saying the equivalent of x xsd:duration y . (from subPropertyOf) y xsd:duration "P12Y" . (from range) Such redundancy seems to point to some problems that perhaps have not been identified yet with this proposal. > and > s:age rdfs:range [ is rdfs:domain of xsd:duration ] . > > and > xsd:duration rdfs:range [ is rdfs:domain of xsd:string ] . > > (datatypes in the S-idiom are properties, that S-imple ;-) This all seems quite clever and may be good fun, but it's IMO a bit too radical a change to impose on the RDF community and also totally blurs the distinction between data type and property, which I don't consider to be correct. Cheers, Patrick
Received on Monday, 19 November 2001 05:36:51 UTC