- 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