- From: Karsten Otto <otto@math.fu-berlin.de>
- Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 13:53:57 +0200 (CEST)
- To: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org, Garret Wilson <garret@globalmentor.com>
On Mon, 15 Sep 2003, Sandro Hawke wrote: > > > If I wanted to http://www.ninebynine.org/2003/09/number#_10 to refer > > > to the resource represented by "10"^^xsd:integer > > > > <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://www.ninebynine.org/2003/09/number#_10"> > > <eg:IsDivisibleBy>2</eg:IsDivisibleBy> > > <rdf:value > > rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema/#integer">10</rdf:value> > > </rdf:Description> > > You seem to be using rdf:value as if it were owl:sameAs, saying the > number 10 has a value which is the number 10. That doesn't seem like > a great use of rdf:value to me, although I do see its appeal. Am I > misunderstanding? (I just checked over a few sources.... [1] [2] > [3].) Jumping into the fray... You are right, this is not a good use of rdf:value, as you can have _:a rdf:value "10". _:a ex:divisibleBy "2". and also _:b rdf:value "10". _:b ex:divisibleBy "2". where _:a and _:b are different nodes in the graph! Considering your original question, this obviously is not what you wanted. The problem is that rdf:value has no formal meaning in the model theory. So IMHO you are better off by using owl:sameAs. Of course, you could also state _:a owl:sameAs _:b. to make the chaos perfect... :-) Regards, Karsten
Received on Monday, 15 September 2003 07:55:33 UTC