W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > August 2002

RE: XML Schema is untidy (was RE: type test case)

From: <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2002 14:43:01 +0300
Message-ID: <A03E60B17132A84F9B4BB5EEDE57957B160B77@trebe006.NOE.Nokia.com>
To: <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
Cc: <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>, <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>, <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, <melnik@db.stanford.edu>, <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Jos De_Roo [mailto:jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com]
> Sent: 08 August, 2002 13:14
> To: Stickler Patrick (NRC/Tampere)
> Cc: Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com; Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk;
> jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com; melnik@db.stanford.edu; w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
> Subject: RE: XML Schema is untidy (was RE: type test case)
> [...]
> -- ,
> Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
> PS
>   :jenny :heightInches float"61.25".
> is OK I think, 

It's not OK as it requires that 'float' be understood
as a native datatype of RDF.

> whereas
>   xsd:float"61.25"
> i.e.
>   <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#float"61.25">
> would violate

I wasn't suggesting a final syntax. That's why
I said "something like"...

Also, I suggested


so "61.25" is not part of the URI.

Also, we're talking about the RDF graph syntax, not
URI syntax. So, as long as the partitioning between
the datatype URI and the lexical form is clear to
RDF, all is well.

> PS2
> terms such as float"61.25" are tidy
> i.e. I can safely intern them

They are only tidy if 'float' is a constant in RDF. Otherwise,
they are just as ambiguous as "61.25" alone.

Received on Thursday, 8 August 2002 07:43:06 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:50:24 EDT