- From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002 17:33:26 -0500
- To: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
- Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
>The first complete draft (excluding introductory and non-normative >material) is available at > > http://www-nrc.nokia.com/sw/rdf-datatyping.html > >and is presented to the WG for review. Impressive piece of work, but Im afraid Im not happy with it in this form. I would prefer to avoid all talk of 'contexts' (ill-defined and potentially confusing) and 'datatyped literals' (which aren't in the current proposal.) I don't know what 'designate' means. Several sections are I think genuinely wrong, most notably 7.1.4. I'll try to respond to the red technical points tonight or v. shortly. Minor point. I know Im going back on what I said before, but now I see all the examples (congrats on those, BTW) I find the closeness of rdfd:datatype and rdfd:Datatype rather anxiety-producing. (Does anyone else agree?) I think we should either go back to rdfd:range or something truly different like rdfd:typeCheckOnRange. Maybe rdfd:drange would be peculiar enough? Pat -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- IHMC (850)434 8903 home 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola, FL 32501 (850)202 4440 fax phayes@ai.uwf.edu http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes
Received on Wednesday, 17 April 2002 18:33:30 UTC