- 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