- From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 18:00:18 +0100
- To: Aaron Swartz <me@aaronsw.com>
- Cc: RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
At 09:43 21/06/2002 -0500, Aaron Swartz wrote: >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. Yup - thanks >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. Done >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 . Done >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. Yes we could do that. I'm making some judgements about how complex to make this question. >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. Thank you. Brian
Received on Wednesday, 26 June 2002 13:01:02 UTC