- From: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2002 12:38:21 +0100
- To: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
I hesitate to tread into this yet again lest I fall through the crust, but heres an idea which might just keep everyone happy. It is a variant on the old idea of semantically untidy literals, but it still supports the critical tidy-style entailment. In our test-case style, here are the entailments you would get. Jenny ex:age '10' . ex:movie ex:title '10' . entail Jenny ex:age _:x . ex:movie ex:title _:x . BUT if you also say (ignore syntactic details) ex:age dtyperange xsd:integer . ex:title dtyperange xsd:string . then that is OK, and now you can infer Jenny ex:age _:y . _:y xsd:integer '10' . ex:movie ex:title _:z . _:z xsd:string '10' . Obviously _:y isn't the same as _:z. The cost is, that _:x isn't the same as either of them. In fact, _:x can't be a datatype value for *any* datatype. Think of it as a kind of generic exemplar for the set of all the possible datatype values, or something like that. Still, it *exists*. This could work with lexically tidy literals, but it would be classed as semantically untidy, I guess. But it would be easy to tweak the MT to allow this. Any takers? Questions? 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
Received on Wednesday, 9 October 2002 07:37:43 UTC