- From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2001 16:46:06 -0500
- To: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
- Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
>Can I try to clarify what I think you're saying... > >Different occurrences of a literal within a graph may map to >different values, but that these mappings are fixed, and may not >change when a different interpretation is used for the graph. Right, that is what I had in mind. However, Peter wants a slightly different notion, in which the interpretation *does* determine (or at any rate *can* determine) the literal mappings. This seems to amount to treating literals rather like bNodes with a kind of potential datatype constraint on them (that can be inferred from rdfs:range assertions in the graph, in Peter's scheme: see http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2001OctDec/0057.html ). I have to say, I don't like this myself. But maybe I will have to just shut up and go along with the crowd. > >Noodling... > > [a Shoe] decimalSize [ a type:Integer ; rdf:value "10" ] ; > sizeLabel [ a type:String ; rdf:value "10" ] . > >The intent here is that the first occurrence is mapped to an >integer, and the second to a string. > >BUT, doesn't this depend in some way on the interpretation of >type:Integer and type:String? Maybe. Actually I'm not sure how to parse that example. Is that two triples or four triples? 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, 10 October 2001 17:46:12 UTC