- From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2002 15:19:09 +0000
- To: "Patrick Stickler" <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>, "ext Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hpl.hp.com>, <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
At 16:00 24/11/2002 +0200, Patrick Stickler wrote:
>[Patrick Stickler, Nokia/Finland, (+358 40) 801 9690,
>patrick.stickler@nokia.com]
>
>
> > Thus, reading the authoritative specs we work out what the values are, and
> > they are the same. Hence, independent of whether our implementations
> > actually do it, the relevant entailments are part of RDF datatyping.
>
>I'm fine with this as long as it is clear (somewhere) that
>datatype entailments involving equality of values between
>different datatypes are based on the definitions of the
>datatypes themselves, and if the relationships between
>the datatypes are not part of the formal definitions of
>the datatypes, then the entailments cannot be determined.
>
>I.e. we need to be clear about the basis for the entailments
>and not work solely on the basis of human intuition.
Patrick,
May I test my understanding of what you mean here. I offer two datatype
definitions and an entailment.
Datatype Definition 1:
URI: http://example.org/datatypes#1
Lexical Space: {"1"}
Values Space: {1}
Mapping: {"1", 1}
Comment: The value space of this datatype is the set containing only
the integer 1.
Datatype Definition 2:
URI: http://example.org/datatypes#2
Lexical Space: {"one"}
Values Space: {1}
Mapping: {"one", 1}
Comment: The value space of this datatype is the set containing only
the integer 1.
Does:
<a> <b> "1"^^http://example.org/datatypes#1 .
<c> <d> "one"^^http://example.org/datatypes#2 .
entail
<a> <b> _:v .
<c> <d> _:v .
The point of this test is that whilst it is true that:
http://example.org/datatypes#1 rdfs:subClassOf http://example.org/datatypes#2 .
http://example.org/datatypes#2 rdfs:subClassOf http://example.org/datatypes#1 .
this is not explicitly stated in the definitions of the datatypes.
Brian
Received on Thursday, 28 November 2002 10:17:44 UTC