W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > May 2001

Re: More questions

From: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@Baltimore.com>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 15:46:58 +0100
Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.2.20010511154313.03fe1bf0@joy.songbird.com>
To: Martyn Horner <martyn.horner@profium.com>
Cc: RDF core WG <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
At 09:36 AM 5/8/01 +0200, Martyn Horner wrote:
>What's the judgement on type IDs (range values etc in RDF) now that the
>XML Schema spec is a Recommendation?

I'm working on something like this for CC/PP, and have come up with the 
following:

   <rdfs:Class rdf:about='&ns-xsdt;integer'>
     <rdfs:label xml:lang="en">Integer value</rdfs:label>
     <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource='&ns-rdfs;Literal'/>
     <rdfs:comment xml:lang="en">
       This class is used to represent any CC/PP attribute value that
       is an integer number.
     </rdfs:comment>
     <rdfs:seeAlso rdf:resource=
         'http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/xmlschema-2.html#integer'/>
   </rdfs:Class>

where &ns-xsdt; expands to the XMLschema datatypes schema URI.

>Arity -- never sure if that's a legitimate word -- can the minOccurs,
>maxOccurs attributes be copied over to RDF definition?

I think they should be left for the logic layer work (DAML+OIL, etc.)

>And another issue worth working on (but I think it's already active):
>digital signing of resources (I guess this brings up questions of
>canonicality of documents and hence works against my `resource is as
>resource does' liberal approach). Is rights management in general part
>of our concern now that we are drifting over to the question of legality
>of RDF assertion?

I think this is out of scope for RDFcore.

#g
Received on Friday, 11 May 2001 13:29:27 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:35:48 EDT