- From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 11:32:42 +0000
- To: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>, "Patrick Stickler" <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
- Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
At 18:19 09/12/2002 -0600, pat hayes wrote: [...] >>I think that it would be better to say that datatype URIs denote >>the datatype class, the instance of rdfs:Datatype, and that the class >>extension is the value space of the datatype. > >that would be clearer. I will rephrase this to make it clear there is no >ambiguity. Hmmm, I'm not so sure about that. I think that datatypes as interpretation properties will be used, and it was Patrick that argued that he didn't want multiple uri's, and Pat's rather neat model theory trick that allows a resource to have both a class and a property extension. If we say that the URI denotes the class, I wonder if we run into problems with the fact that its up to xsd to say what the URI denotes and into issues with the using the same uri for both the class and the property. My mental model was that the URI denoted the datatype, as specified by the xsd folks - its their uri after all, and we define what the class extension of that URI is. Brian >Pat > >>I.e. the URI denotes just >>one thing, the class, and that class happens to have associated with it >>the semantics which capture the lexical space and L2V mapping. >> >>Saying the datatype URI means two things, a datatype and the value space >>of the datatype as a class (set) seems to violate the fundamental >>uniqueness principle of URIs. >> >>Or am I just confused... >> >>Patrick >> >>[Patrick Stickler, Nokia/Finland, (+358 40) 801 9690, >>patrick.stickler@nokia.com] > > >-- >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >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 Wednesday, 11 December 2002 06:31:20 UTC