- From: Aaron Swartz <me@aaronsw.com>
- Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 09:43:55 -0500
- To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
I will admit up front I have done a poor job of following the datatypes discussion, but perhaps that will allow me to point out places where things are not clear. On Friday, June 21, 2002, at 09:12 AM, Brian McBride wrote: > It is not possible to have the answers to Test B, Test C and Test D all > be yes. Either B and C can be yes or D can be yes. We have to decide > which of these is the most important to have; (B and C) or D. It seems to me that we would not want B and C to be yes. We would want B alone to be yes. It would be helpful to explicitly state that this is not possible. A nit is that QNames in N-Triples should not have <>s around them, because then they look like new URI schemes. I think it would be clearer to say: <ageInYears> rdfs:range xsd:decimal . Another question that comes to mind is whether we can have: Test D2: <Jenny> <ageInYearsDecimalNumeral> "10" . <ageInYearsDecimalNumeral > rdfs:range xsd:decimal . <ageInYearsDecimalNumeral> rdfd:abstract <ageInYears> . xsd:decimal rdfd:concrete xsdr:decimal . <John> <ageInYears> _:a . _:a <xsdr:decimal> "10" . Which seems to avoid the overloading of the previous. Then I could use simple inference rules to transform the former into the latter. This is how I approach the similar problem in something like authorName vs. author. N3 Rule: {?thing ?prop ?num . ?prop rdfs:range ?range . ?prop rdfd:abstact ?abs . ?range rdfd:concrete ?valprop } => { ?thing ?abs _:a . _:a ?valprop ?num } . Otherwise this seems to be a good summary. -- Aaron Swartz [http://www.aaronsw.com] 4FAC4838B7D8D13FA6D92EDB4145521E79F0DF4B
Received on Friday, 21 June 2002 10:43:57 UTC