- From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
- Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2002 16:37:04 +0300
- To: RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Please read the following carefully and possibly several times before blasting away at it. Thanks. -- I assert that the following are true and should be captured by the RDF Datatyping specification: 1. The purpose of RDF Datatyping is to exchange knowledge containing datatype values. 2. The means by which RDF Datatyping captures knowledge about datatype values is by associating lexical forms (literals) with datatypes (URIrefs). 2. A datatyping idiom is an expression of a datatyped value which associates a lexical form with a datatype, and is comprised of (a) a literal, taken to be a lexical form, (b) a URI, taken to identify a datatype, and optionally (c) a blank node which denotes the datatype value represented by the lexical form according to the lexical to value mapping of the specified datatype. 3. A literal which occurs as part of a datatyping idiom always denotes itself, the string, even though it is also understood to represent a datatype value in conjunction with the specified datatype. This is not a contradiction. The literal by itself cannot identify a datatype value. It is only the combination of the literal and datatype which provide sufficient information to identify a datatype value. 4. The value denoted by a blank node occurring as part of a lexical form or datatype property idiom is unknown to RDF. It can only be known externally to RDF with the addition of full knowledge of the datatype mapping. Thus, datatype clashes cannot occur within RDF. I consider sections 2-4 of the datatyping WD to capture these truths. Whether the terminology used is optimal, or whether the concept of datatyped literal pairings is acceptable or not, and whether it remains or is removed, is a separate matter. I am happy to rephrase those sections to the satisfaction of the WG, or allow any other WG member to do so, but I consider the above truths to hold and will expect any rewording of the datatyping specification to reflect them. If the datatyping MT in section 5 does not fully capture the above, then I consider it to be either incorrect, or incomplete. Of course, the WG is free to correct me on any of the above if it does not reflect a majority view. 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, 18 April 2002 14:24:53 UTC