"Peter F. Patel-Schneider" wrote: > > From: Frank Manola <fmanola@mitre.org> > Subject: Re: DATATYPES: mental dump. > Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 12:29:32 -0500 > > > Graham Klyne wrote: > > > > > > At 10:14 PM 11/12/01 +0200, Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com wrote: > > > >It's one thing for RDF based *applications* to support and > > > >utilized XML Schema simple data types and their lexical and > > > >value spaces, but IMO RDF should itself be completely neutral > > > >to any particular data type scheme. > > > > > > I agree. > > > > > > My reading of what Peter/Dan have been saying is that XML schema datatypes > > > should be primus inter pares for data types in RDF, not somehow embedded in > > > the core of RDF. (Which I think is fine.) > > > > As long as a classical education isn't going to be required in order to > > read our specifications :-) > > On the other hand, I have little sympathy (as far as reading > specifications) for people without either a mathematical education > or the ability to pick up a small number of not-very-difficult > mathematical concepts. [no :-)] > > After all, it is probably less effort to pick up the mathematical concepts > required for simple model theory than to understand a normal ISO > specification. [big :-)] > Verbum sapienti sat est! --Frank -- Frank Manola The MITRE Corporation 202 Burlington Road, MS A345 Bedford, MA 01730-1420 mailto:fmanola@mitre.org voice: 781-271-8147 FAX: 781-271-8752Received on Tuesday, 13 November 2001 13:29:30 EST
This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:42:38 EDT