Re: A very short list of residual datatyping issues (just one ;-)

On 2002-03-13 18:50, "ext Graham Klyne" <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
wrote:

> At 09:04 AM 3/13/02 +0200, Patrick Stickler wrote:
>> So, when used with rdfs:drange, the URI denotes the complete
>> datatype but when used with rdfs:range and rdfs:domain,
>> the URI denotes only the value space of the datatype?
>> 
>> So, the URI denotes different things in different contexts?
> 
> No, the denotation of the URI doesn't change with context.
> 
> What does change is the part of the denotation that is used.
> 
> If a URI is a property and a class, then its denotation includes (is
> associated with) a relational extension and a class extension.  When the
> URI is used as a property, the relational extension is used to determine
> the truth of the containing statement.  When the URI is used as the object
> of an rdf:type property, the class extension is used.  The RDF semantics
> provides this much completely separately from the issue of datatyping.
> 
> So, when a datatype URI is used with range, one part of its denotation (the
> class extension) is accessed.  When used with drange, another part (related
> to the definition of L2V) is used.

Thanks for the explaination. I understand the distinction now.

I think that it would be good to have some verbage somewhere that
clarifies these points for less-technical users, so that they at
least have reasonable guidelines/examples of when to use rdfs:range
and when to use rdfs:drange, and the ramifications of both.

> Conclusion:  I don't see any difficulty here.

Perhaps not a technical one, but possibly a practical one.

Patrick

--
               
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, 14 March 2002 02:45:42 UTC