Re: Datatyping Summary

On 2002-01-31 15:53, "ext Frank Manola" <fmanola@mitre.org> wrote:

> Thanks;  that helps.  As I said in my original reply to Brian, I'm
> trying to keep straight what we have to actually *write* (or physically
> represent) in the different proposals vs. what concepts we have to be
> thinking about.
> 
> --Frank

Right. Insofar as RDF/XML or ntriples is concerned, you don't have
to write TDL pairs. The pairs are inferable from local or global typing,
and are the basis for interpretation, but are not part of the
graph syntax itself (even if components of the graph syntax are
used, per specific idioms, to define those pairings).

Or did I just muddle up any clarification I may have earlier provided? ;-)

Patrick

> Patrick Stickler wrote:
> 
>> On 2002-01-31 0:19, "ext Brian McBride" <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> Hi Frank,
>>> 
>>> At 16:37 30/01/2002 -0500, Frank Manola wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Sorry, what do you mean by "extended n-triples representation"?
>>>> 
>>> In TDL, a literal is a pair.
>>> 
>> 
>> No. In the TDL *MT* a literal is a pair. In TDL, the actual
>> model, a literal is a literal -- a string that may be interpreted
>> as a lexical form of some datatype, in the context of that
>> datatype.
>> 
>> Please let's keep this straight. If there's a problem with
>> the MT for TDL, fine, but that doesn't equate to a problem
>> with TDL (though I appreciate that the mathematicians may
>> only want to look at the MT and ignore what the MT is supposed
>> to be capturing).
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> 
>> Patrick
>> 
>> --
>>                
>> Patrick Stickler              Phone: +358 50 483 9453
>> Senior Research Scientist     Fax:   +358 7180 35409
>> Nokia Research Center         Email: patrick.stickler@nokia.com
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 

--
               
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, 31 January 2002 08:55:02 UTC