- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2002 16:42:21 -0000
- To: "Graham Klyne" <GK@NineByNine.org>, "RDF core WG" <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Sorry I missed this earlier. I hope it is now irrelevant, but here is an answer anyway. Assuming we allow URIs to map to values as well as resources then you could declare both a domain and range cosntraint on ex:succ and this would work as well as any other datatyping proposal. You also need to say something about the uniqueness or unambiguity of ex:succ, which you can't do in RDF - you need webont. Jeremy > -----Original Message----- > From: w3c-rdfcore-wg-request@w3.org > [mailto:w3c-rdfcore-wg-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Graham Klyne > Sent: 01 February 2002 12:04 > To: Jeremy Carroll; RDF core WG > Subject: Datatyping, text case > > > Jeremy, > > I think your revised TDL model theory addresses the big self-entailment > problem, but I'm still concerned by the interaction between the > denotation > of literals as pairs, and the denotation of other nodes which nominally > mean the same thing. Basically, I'm not sure I understand how that is > meant to work. > > So here are a couple of test cases to prime the discussion: > > Does this: > ex:zero rdf:value "0" . > ex:one ex:succ ex:zero . > _:one ex:succ ex:zero . > _:one rdf:value "1" . > entail this: > ex:one rdf:value "1" . > ? > > Or does: > ex:one ex:succ "0" . > _:one ex:succ "0" . > _:one rdf:value "1" . > entail: > ex:one rdf:value "1" . > ? > > In each case, the short answer is fairly clearly "no". So the real > question is: what else do I have to say, or what assumptions must I make > about the nature of ex:succ. Intuitively, ex:succ would conform to: > > IEXT(I(ex:succ)) = { <0,1>, <1,2>, <2,3>, ... etc. } > > (I took a look at DanC's > www.w3.org/2001/03swell/pra.n3http://www.w3.org/2001/03swell/pra.n3 for > some clues, but couldn't really get any traction on it.) > > #g > > > -------------------------- > __ > /\ \ Graham Klyne > / \ \ (GK@ACM.ORG) > / /\ \ \ > / / /\ \ \ > / / /__\_\ \ > / / /________\ > \/___________/ > > >
Received on Tuesday, 5 February 2002 11:42:08 UTC