- From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2002 18:50:53 -0600
- To: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
- Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
> >>>Graham Klyne said: >> I think Aaron said it better. I don't think this is an issue that should >> be postponed. > >The issue http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-replace-value >is recorded as: > Suggestion that the rdf:value property be replaced by rdf:toString. > >So I propose that: > We reject this suggestion as an unnecessary change > ACTION the model theory editor (Pat) to explain what rdf:value means Well, I would if I knew. This is central to the datatyping discussion as well. If literals always denote strings, then rdf:type (actually rdfd:type in my proposal) is a kind of generic inverse to the datatype lexical-to-value mapping. If literal nodes (not bnodes somewhere nearby , but the actual literals) are interpreted relative to datatype information, then rdfd:type is essentially just equality. Pat -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- IHMC (850)434 8903 home 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola, FL 32501 (850)202 4440 fax phayes@ai.uwf.edu http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes
Received on Monday, 4 February 2002 19:50:20 UTC