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

Re: datatypes and MT (things versus their names: PRIMER)

From: Bill de hOra <bdehora@interx.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2001 13:15:03 -0000
To: <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <004601c16857$62285b60$01000001@MITCHUM>
> Pat Hayes 
>
> I have serious problems with this. For a start, why on earth would
> anyone say that latitude and longitude and elevation were *strings*?
> They clearly aren't strings, so this is just plain wrong.

Dan Connolly
>>
(a) I agree people write stuff this way, and (b) I agree
it's just plain wrong, so (c) I think it's critical that
this issue (things versus their names, numbers vs. numerals...)
is treated by the primer.

Case in point: folks write
	<dc:creator>Dan Connolly</dc:creator>
as if a character sequence "D" "a" "n" ... wrote a book.
It's critical that we teach folks to write
	<dc:creator>
	  <Person>
	    <fullName>Dan Connolly</fullName>
          </Person>
        </dc:creator>

>>


Why is it critical? Yes, it doesn't help that dc:creator doesn't have
its meaning written down formally. But if we interpret: 

	<dc:creator>Dan Connolly</dc:creator> 

as if a character sequence created a page, then we interpret:

	<dc:creator>
	  <Person>
	    <fullName>Dan Connolly</fullName>
          </Person>
        </dc:creator>

as if well formed XML element content created a page; in fact in the
RDF-XML context:

	Dan Connolly

is XML also. If we're going to beg a nonsense interpretation of
dc:creator's definition, let's at least do it consistently. Adding a few
tags does nowt critical that I can see.

regards,
Bill 
Received on Thursday, 8 November 2001 08:18:40 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:42:34 EDT