- From: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
- Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 09:32:02 +0100
- To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Cc: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
At 04:17 PM 4/18/02 -0500, Pat Hayes wrote: >>> Some of our customers definitely do not want to be located there. >>> They WANT to be able to be sloppy about datatype values, mix talk of >>> strings with talk of integers, etc., and still they want to invoke >>> lexical form checking using datatypes. >> >>I understood the concerns/desires differently. I heard that they >>wanted to be able to use the inline idiom and leave the interpretation >>entirely to the application, or at most, indicate which datatypes >>should apply to the interpretation of which literal values. >> >>But perhaps you're right, and I've misunderstood... > >Well, check this out with Graham. Well, speaking for CC/PP, as currently designed (and, by association, UAProf as I understand it's currently implemented): The starting point is this: the applications uses literals in places where the intent is to express a number, or some other value; e.g. something akin to: HardwarePlatform ex:dpi "100" . The _implementations_ to date interpret this as meaning a display resolution in dots-per-inch is 100 (the number). Yes, I know this is what Patrick argues for -- BUT (and this is a big "BUT") it's the application that makes that interpretation, not RDF as described by Pat's document [1]. I would like it to be otherwise --i.e. RDF datatyping would provide the interpretation of "10" as a number-- but I can also accept that it's not absolutely necessary for CC/PP to work pretty much as designed, with extra-RDF help from the CC/PP applications. For this reason, I personally preferred Pat's previous proposal [2], but that is ruled out on the grounds of requiring tidy literals. CC/PP has no requirement for the entailments that depend on tidy literals. Typical CC/PP might include something like: :HardwarePlatform ccpp-attribute:dpi "100" . :SoftwarePlatform ccpp-attribute:softwareVersion "100" . with no intended relationship between the two instances of "100". But the current tidy literals proposal [1] can work with CC/PP by virtue of pushing interpretation of the literals into the application (which knows about the properties). The _application_ may choose to notice rdfd:range properties and apply corresponding interpretations, but that is _application_ knowledge being applied, not RDF semantics. (Yes, it would be nice if RDF semantics covered this, but I've already mentioned that.) (And as a parting shot: [1] requires changes to CC/PP schema as currently drafted, [2] I think does not.) #g -- [1] http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/users/phayes/simpledatatype23-02-2002.html [2] http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/users/phayes/simpledatatype2.html ------------------- Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org>
Received on Friday, 19 April 2002 04:56:49 UTC