Re: simplified datatyping proposal

>Pat:
>
>>  1. [Patrick?] and Graham want range-sensitive inline literals.
>>  2. Dan C. wants an inline literal used with no datatyping to
>>  unambiguously denote a character string.
>>  3. We all want the logic to be monotonic.
>
>>  Something has to give.
>
>
>I want range-sensitive inline literals.
>For me that was a major motivation for TDL, and an attraction of P.
>It is also IMO the only *requirement* as opposed to *disederata*.

OK, then lets go that way. Following Patrick's recent Occam 
suggestion, we can also abandon rdfs:drange, and just use 
oldfashioned rdfs:range, thereby getting rid of almost all the extra 
vocabulary. The only cost is that now asserting a range to be a 
datatype gets you datatype checking whether you want it or not, but I 
guess that is unlikely to be a problem in practice (and there is a 
hack to avoid it in any case which we can put into an appendix so as 
not to frighten the DPH).

<snip>
>.....
>  Perhaps we should drop all other disiderata. i.e. just do this, and do it
>in such a way as we remain agnostic about which model theoretic treatment
>(S-B or P+Bermuda) we use.
>
>The only practical differences are whether certain corner case descriptions
>are ill-formed or not.
>
>(eg. prop --range--> integer, prop--range--> string, r--prop-->"10")
>
>We can punt on the model theory for datatyping, and provide a syntax for the
>one bit we can agree on.

I'd rather not punt on the MT, if only to keep things as clear and 
unambiguous as possible. Its not like its hard to do an MT for this, 
after all. (And I have an ulterior motive, which is to use this as a 
kind of proof-of-concept for a more general 'layering' technique, so 
I'm asking y'all to bear with me on this. I'll write it up and post 
it tonight.)

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 Thursday, 21 February 2002 19:03:58 UTC