Re: Subtler simplified datatypes.

On 2002-02-21 3:28, "ext Pat Hayes" <phayes@ai.uwf.edu> wrote:

> Whoops, a nasty typo in the following:
> 
>> Ok, guys. Another version now at
>>  http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/users/phayes/simpledatatype1.html
>> This changes the previous one as follows.
>> 
>> 1. S-B idiom now works with rdfs:drange; in fact, the S-A and S-B
>> idioms are synonymous and can be interchanged with each other.
>> 
>> In some ways, this makes it all even simpler. We can tell people:
>> Look, you can just use literals as objects and rdfs:dtype
> 
> I meant rdfs:drange. The idea is that most 'in-line' users will only
> need to know about drange.

I probably should have posted my union-based proposal to the
list (I was trying to spare the general WG membership from the
gory details of yet another datatyping discussion ;-)

But if we take that even more constrained, simpler proposal
(I'll repost it) then we don't need any new vocabulary at
all, only rdfs:range, and things work as folks seem to have
been presuming, that the type of inline literals is specified
by rdfs:range, plain and simple.

Patrick

--
               
Patrick Stickler              Phone: +358 50 483 9453
Senior Research Scientist     Fax:   +358 7180 35409
Nokia Research Center         Email: patrick.stickler@nokia.com

Received on Thursday, 21 February 2002 03:50:30 UTC