Re: Question about SHOULD in MT from Patrick Stickler on 2002-12-10 (w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org from December 2002)

From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 12:13:50 +0200
To: "ext pat hayes" <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Cc: <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <009a01c2a034$d5cd2490$7480720a@NOE.Nokia.com>

[Patrick Stickler, Nokia/Finland, (+358 40) 801 9690, patrick.stickler@nokia.com]

> On reflection, I don't think we should shilly-shally with 'typically' 
> when using this strict language, so Ive simplified this to:

I agree. I hesitantly put that in out of deference to the folks that
really, really would prefer to see a SHOULD apply to the XML Schema
datatypes as well. But I agree, it's cleaner to leave it out.

> A 'datatype-aware' RDF engine SHOULD be competent to recognize at 
> least the built-in rdf:XMLLiteral datatype. It MAY also recognize the 
> set of all the XML Schema built-in datatypes.

Sounds good to me.

Patrick

Received on Tuesday, 10 December 2002 05:14:43 UTC