From: Pat Hayes (phayes@ai.uwf.edu)
Date: 10/02/01
>It's also possible to design a language where the type of >a literal may *depend* on a declaration from an XML schema: > > <kr:KRLang xmlns:rdf="http://...new-kr-lang..." > xmlns:ex="http://example/vocab"> > <ex:Person> > <ex:name>John Doe</ex:name> > <ex:shoeSize>10</ex:shoeSize> > </ex:Person> > >so that the "10" above is not a logical constant at all; >not until you find a/the schema for http://example/vocab >do you know how to parse/interpret "10"... i.e. the >meaning of that chunk of XML is dependent on all the >trust issues around following links from one document >to another (not to mention a complete implementation >of XML Schema, an effort several orders of magnitude >larger than an RDF 1.0 parser). That is what I was thinking of in an earlier reply to you on this topic (on rdf-logic), but I didn't fully appreciate the force of the doctrinal imperative: >This sort of language is not a candidate for a future >version of RDF: it fails to meet >one of the basic requirements of RDF: that an RDF document >stands on its own as a logical formula. Ah. OK, then I will stop going on about it. 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
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 04/02/02 EST