- From: <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>
- Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2001 09:49:56 +0300
- To: connolly@w3.org
- Cc: champin@bat710.univ-lyon1.fr, www-rdf-interest@w3.org, www-rdf-logic@w3.org
> -----Original Message----- > From: ext Dan Connolly [mailto:connolly@w3.org] > Sent: 27 September, 2001 16:50 > To: Stickler Patrick (NRC/Tampere) > Cc: champin@bat710.univ-lyon1.fr; www-rdf-interest@w3.org; > www-rdf-logic@w3.org > Subject: Re: Literals (Re: model theory for RDF/S) > > > Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com wrote: > [...] > > The way I currently do qualified values is to employ an explicit > > 'qualified value' class x:QValue for which the following > > constraints/characteristics are defined: > [...] > > Anyone else think this would be a good idea to pursue? > > Yes, I prefer something like that too... in particular, see: > > Using XML Schema Datatypes in RDF and DAML+OIL > proposal Jan 2001 > http://www.w3.org/2001/01/ct24 > > But it's hard to say this is a clarification of RDF 1.0... > i.e. it's hard to say that implementors of RDF 1.0 should have > implemented it this way. Well, depending on where one likes to draw lines (and it seems most folks have their own unique opinion on that ;-) I think it would be reasonable to ground the semantics of such a key construct in RDF space, as a specialized case of rdf:value. I.e., rather than x:QValue, one could define rdf:qvalue and such a typed anonymous node would have clearly and explicitly defined semantics and constraints per the official RDF standard -- such that someone producing large amounts of knowledge using such constructs can be assured that any RDF compliant system will enforce those constraints and any system vendor creating an RDF application will be fully aware of the intended purpose and semantics of such constructs. The intimate relationship that the rdf:qvalue class would have with the rdf:value class seems (to me at least) to justify it being grounded in the same semantic layer, rather than somewhere else (such as RDFS, DAML, DC, etc.) > [why the crosspost, by the way?] Just hitting "Reply to All" ;-) Which list did you think needs to be removed? Cheers, Patrick -- Patrick Stickler Phone: +358 3 356 0209 Senior Research Scientist Mobile: +358 50 483 9453 Nokia Research Center Fax: +358 7180 35409 Visiokatu 1, 33720 Tampere, Finland Email: patrick.stickler@nokia.com
Received on Friday, 28 September 2001 02:50:53 UTC