- From: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 11:29:21 -0500
- To: jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com
- Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Hi Jeremy While I appreciate that you were trying to make my life easier, I don't think this does, since this particular datatype is so different from all the others that it will need to be given a special semantic treatment in any case: and I think it would be less confusing if we simply said that undatatyped literals were indeed un-datatyped and they always denote themselves. This way we get the same entailments and avoid all the debates about whether a datatype should map from a string or a pair, etc etc. . And this also neatly handles the lang tag issue, since if the syntax says that the lang tag is part of the literal, then indeed it is there in the denotation; and if it says it isn't, then it isn't. The semantics in this case just tracks the syntax. The rdfs:XMLLiteral is a masterpiece, on the other hand, and I would like to keep that around. 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 Friday, 25 October 2002 12:29:25 UTC