W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > December 2002

Re: Should rdf:value have a semantics?? (was: Re: Quick review of RDFprimer)

From: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 14:51:22 -0600
Message-Id: <p05111b1bba12c6faf35d@[]>
To: fmanola@mitre.org
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org

>More discussion below:


>  >
>>  So more generally, to the WG: should I give rdf:value a model theory?
>>  Speak soon, guys. Unless I hear otherwise I will do this:
>>  aaa rdf:value "bbb" .
>>  means that there is some conventional mapping M from lexical forms
>>  under which I(aaa) = M(bbb). Doesn't say much, but it might be
>>  useful, particularly if we say that any datatype L2V mapping counts
>>  as a 'conventional mapping'.
>I'm not clear on something.  This doesn't preclude the value of an
>rdf:value property from being a typed literal does it?

Well, yes, it would, but isn't that appropriate? I guess it might 
make sense to say

aaa rdf:value "10"^^xsd:string .

but one might as well omit the type in this case; and it would never 
make sense to say

  aaa rdf:value "10"^^xsd:integer .

since integers aren't lexical forms.
(If this does make sense, what is it supposed to mean?)


>Frank Manola                   The MITRE Corporation
>202 Burlington Road, MS A345   Bedford, MA 01730-1420
>mailto:fmanola@mitre.org       voice: 781-271-8147   FAX: 781-271-8752

IHMC					(850)434 8903   home
40 South Alcaniz St.			(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola              			(850)202 4440   fax
FL 32501           				(850)291 0667    cell
phayes@ai.uwf.edu	          http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes
s.pam@ai.uwf.edu   for spam
Received on Tuesday, 3 December 2002 15:51:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:24:19 UTC