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

Re: checked RDF semantics for XSD stuff, couldn't grok namespace entailment

From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 11:37:15 +0200
Message-ID: <00a401c2a4e6$b808e820$eb9316ac@NOE.Nokia.com>
To: "pat hayes" <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>, "ext Graham Klyne" <GK@NineByNine.org>
Cc: "Dan Connolly" <connolly@w3.org>, <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>



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


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "ext Graham Klyne" <GK@NineByNine.org>
To: "pat hayes" <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Cc: "Dan Connolly" <connolly@w3.org>; <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>; <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Sent: 15 December, 2002 13:31
Subject: Re: checked RDF semantics for XSD stuff, couldn't grok namespace entailment


> 
> At 01:31 AM 12/14/02 -0600, pat hayes wrote:
> >>I sure wish we had specified that
> >>
> >>   _:fourtyTwo xsd:integer "42".
> >>
> >>works. Bummer. Rats. Frap.
> >
> >Yeh, I tend to agree that would have been harmless and useful. Im still 
> >not sure how we lost that, to tell you the truth. It seems to have just 
> >got dropped and we were in too much of a hurry to pick it up again.
> 
> Yeah... seems that way.

I think the motivation was to define as few possible ways
to say the same thing in the interest of efficient interchange.

We already have a way to explicitly express a datatype value.

We don't need two "official" ways to do the same thing.

That, of course, does not prevent anyone from using datatyping
properties as a proprietary methodology...

Patrick
Received on Monday, 16 December 2002 04:41:59 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:54:55 EDT