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

Re: A basis for convergence and closure?

From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2002 21:21:52 +0200
To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <B885FD70.D4C8%patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
On 2002-02-05 17:37, "Patrick Stickler" <patrick.stickler@nokia.com> wrote:

> On 2002-02-05 17:20, "ext Patrick Stickler" <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
> wrote:
> 
>> My comments below.
>> 
>>> 5:    Do we allow S-A idiom?
>> 
>> No ;-)
> 
> In all fairness, I think I should explain my 'no' vote.

One additional comment about S-A with regards
to feedback from the XML Schema folks

(Sorry if I seem a bit overboard on this, but I feel
this comment is very important, and relates to
concerns expressed by others than myself, which
makes it all the more notable ;-)

There has been quite some strong postings against
RDF's treatment of namespace prefix use for xsd
datatypes, based on the incompatable methods used
by XML Schema and RDF to derive URIs from qnames.

The rdf:dtype bNode idioms fortunately avoid this
issue entirely by not requiring qnames to be used for
XML Schema datatypes, ever.

The S-A idiom throws us right into the middle of
that quagmire. Or alternately, forces us to define
a synonymous set of URIs that the XML Schema folks
won't shout about, which are then related to the
full XML Schema URIs.

So, given all the different complications surrounding
S-A, even if each one alone could be accepted, the
total sum of these becomes overwhelming.

Anyway, I'm going to bed now...  night all!

Patrick

--
               
Patrick Stickler              Phone: +358 50 483 9453
Senior Research Scientist     Fax:   +358 7180 35409
Nokia Research Center         Email: patrick.stickler@nokia.com
Received on Tuesday, 5 February 2002 14:23:56 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:45:05 EDT