- From: <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>
- Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 08:01:19 +0200
- To: phayes@ai.uwf.edu, Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com
- Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
> the usual usage is that the datatype name refers to the value space > rather than the lexical space, I'm not sure I agree 100% with that, such that I think that common usage may put more emphasis on the value space, but also includes the lexical space. I.e. XML Schema defines not only the value space, but *two* lexical spaces -- canonical and non-canonical -- for each simple data type. All programming languages define both value space and lexical space for each primitive data type. If they didn't define the lexical space, you couldn't write program code. So, if one were to list all of the data type schemes in "common usage" today, I would bet that the significant majority of them define both value space and lexical space (even if the lexical space is considered to be of secondary importance, which of course, it is). Do their even exist any commonly used (in software engineering) "upper level" data type schemes that only define value spaces and deliberately leave lexical spaces undefined? Or is that even possible? Even mathematics needs its notations... Cheers, Patrick
Received on Wednesday, 21 November 2001 01:01:33 UTC