Re: quick comment on typed literals

I don't think that the entailment requires knowledge of
the datatype. It is just relating synonymous forms of
expression, not adding any knowledge. If the typed
literal is invalid, then the bnode triple will be invalid, but
one does not need to ensure validity to equate the two
forms of expression.

Patrick


_____________Original message ____________
Subject:	Re: quick comment on typed literals
Sender:	ext Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
Date:		Mon, 11 Nov 2002 12:20:07 +0300


Hmmm... when I stumbled across that niggle, I wondered if you might not 
introduce some "bottom" concept into the domain of interpretation, so even 
invalid lexical forms have a denotation.

#g
--

At 06:36 PM 11/6/02 -0600, pat hayes wrote:

>In case anyone was wondering, the reason that the inference
>
>aaa bbb "foo"^^ddd .
>-->
>aaa bbb _:xxx .
>_:xxx rdf:type ddd .
>
>didnt get put into RDFS (but was left until the datatypes were introduced) 
>is because, contrary to what I first thought, this inference DOES depend 
>on access to datatype information, in order to check that 'foo' is a legal 
>lexical form according to the datatype ddd.  So even though it doesnt 
>depend on the particular value, it does need external datatype information 
>to be valid.
>
>Just a quick explanation.
>
>Also, after Jos' question I guess I ought to either remove that comment or 
>else put in a bit more explanation. Sigh.
>
>Pat
>--
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>IHMC                                    (850)434 8903   home
>40 South Alcaniz St.                    (850)202 4416   office
>Pensacola                                       (850)202 4440   fax
>FL 32501                                        (850)291 0667    cell
>phayes@ai.uwf.edu                 http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes
>s.pam@ai.uwf.edu   for spam

-------------------
Graham Klyne
<GK@NineByNine.org>

Received on Monday, 11 November 2002 05:46:56 UTC