Re: Punning not harmless

"Bob MacGregor" <macgregor@ISI.EDU> writes:
> To assert that the class  xsdr:decimal  has arity one (using someone's arity 
> property)
> would be:
> 
>    <xsdr:decimal> <arity> 1
> 
> To assert that the property  xsdr:decimal has arity two would be:
> 
>    <xsdr:decimal> <arity> 2
> 
> I will (partially) rescind my objection if someone can tell me how
> to distinguish between the two denotations of <xsdr:decimal> (or
> whatever class and property), using a triples syntax.  I say
> "partially" because I still believe that punning is more trouble
> than it is worth. 

Use two different "arity" properties.  You're assuming arity-of-a-
class and arity-of-a-property are the same thing.  I'm guessing you
mean the first to be number-of-instances (of a class) and the second
to be number-of-values (of a property, for some individual).  One
could argue those are not the same thing at all.

So we can pun (overload, use ambiguously) either the subject or the
predicate, but not both, I think.

       -- sandro