Re: rdf:value backwards? [was: a few issues...]

>pat hayes wrote:
>[...]
> > This is supposed to be saying that a string  has something as its
> > linguistic 'value', but the value comes first. In other words, it's
> > saying that the string is a NAME for the thing. So how about
> > rdf:nameIs, or (since this is being used with an equality sign which
> > conveys the 'is' already) rdf:nameOf or rdf:nameFor ?
>
>The closest W3C-Recommended precedent I can think of
>is rdfs:label; is that close enough?
>
>i.e. traditional-kr:Thing is to rdf:Resource
>as traditional-kr:Name is to rdfs:label.
>
>Perhaps it's best to exploit that precedent,
>but make a new name for this specialized use:
>
>	:lexRep a daml:UnambiguousProperty;
>		rdfs:subPropertyOf rdfs:label;
>		rdfs:domain xsd:anySimpleType;
>		rdfs:range xsd:string.

That seems OK. I kind of dislike having to switch from use to mention 
every time I see 'lexRep', but I guess I'm going to have to get used 
to this.

Pat

---------------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC					(850)434 8903   home
40 South Alcaniz St.			(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola,  FL 32501			(850)202 4440   fax
phayes@ai.uwf.edu 
http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes

Received on Tuesday, 20 February 2001 12:04:25 UTC