Re: RDF Datatyping Working Draft

On 2002-04-03 22:31, "ext Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com> wrote:

> Consider:
> 
> <John> <ex:age> _:x .
> _:x <xsd:integer> "25" .
> <Judy> <ex:age> _:y .
> _:y <rdfd:lex> "25" .
> <ex:age> <rdfd:range> <xsd:integer> .
> <Jane> <ex:age> "25" .
> <foo> <bar> "25" .
> <bar>  <rdfd:range> <xsd:string> .
> 
> 
> In the model theoretic interpretation with no datatyping (and tidy literals)
> this entails:
> 
> <Jane> <ex:age> _:a .
> <foo> <bar> _:a .
> 
> but not
> 
> <Jane> <ex:age> _:c .
> <John> <ex:age> _:c .

Correct. Because without the combination of the inline idiom with
rdfd:range, one cannot infer the same datatyped literal pairing
as is inferred by the datatype property idiom.

The datatyping interpretation expands the knowledge in the graph,
it doesn't change it.

> In the datatyping interpretation (following the picture 6.1.3) this entails:
> 
> <Jane> <ex:age> _:c .
> <John> <ex:age> _:c .
> 
> but not
> 
> <Jane> <ex:age> _:a .
> <foo> <bar> _:a .

No. This still holds, if _:a denotes the literal "25". I.e. both
Jane and foo have a property which share the same object node,
the literal node "25".

What would not hold is

   foo bar _:c .

Thus, more explicitly, both of the following are true in the
datatyping interpretation:

   Jane ex:age <val:(http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema%23integer)25> .
   John ex:age <val:(http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema%23integer)25> .

and also

   Jane ex:age "25" .  # this doesn't change
   foo bar "25" .

but not

   foo bar <val:(http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema%23integer)25> .
 
Is there really non-montonicity here?

Patrick

--
               
Patrick Stickler              Phone: +358 50 483 9453
Senior Research Scientist     Fax:   +358 7180 35409
Nokia Research Center         Email: patrick.stickler@nokia.com

Received on Thursday, 4 April 2002 00:40:59 UTC