W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > June 2011

Re: SPARQL 1.1 Entailment Regimes

From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2011 12:38:14 +0100
Cc: antoine.zimmermann@insa-lyon.fr, public-rdf-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <9BBED72E-2157-4A06-A5E7-ADC24D4E02F8@cyganiak.de>
To: Alex Hall <alexhall@revelytix.com>

On 9 Jun 2011, at 16:17, Alex Hall wrote:
> For those interested, I pulled all this together on a wiki page:
> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/XSD_Datatypes

For completeness, I added those XSD 1.0 types that are explicitly noted as being excluded from RDF.

Are there any new types in XSD 1.1 that are not listed in the table?

> A couple of questions arise from this:
> 1. Should RDF's XSD datatype map be expanded to include the new XSD 1.1 xsd:dateTimeStamp (referenced by OWL2)?


And perhaps the various forms of durations too. (xsd:duration not being included in RDF is awkward, as one comes across ISO-8601 durations reasonably often in non-RDF formats.)

> 2. Should we reference the new XSD1.1 spec for RDF?


Are these XSD 1.1 questions an ISSUE in the tracker yet?

Received on Friday, 10 June 2011 11:39:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:01:59 UTC