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

RE: Datatyping Summary

From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 11:17:44 -0600
Message-Id: <p05101037b87c7fed11a5@[]>
To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Dan, you had almost convinced that some version of the S proposal is 
the best way for RDF to go, but then you said this:

>To me, it comes down to this: In the RDF community, do folks
>expect that "abc" always denotes the same thing as "abc"?
>I looked at the Jena source, and it seems to.
>The squish, rql, rdfdb and other query languages seem to.
>That's why I objected to the DAML design; it undermines
>a popular assumption in the RDF community. (not to
>mention that I find it ugly that we can't use
>strings and URIs as the basic building blocks
>for knowledge exchange).

Re first paragraph above; are they really expecting that "abc" always 
*denotes* the same thing as "abc", for literals? (Not just that "abc" 
is the same string as "abc" , i.e.) Because if they are, then they 
really seem to me to just not doing datayping at all. Which is fine, 
I guess; but then we are supposed to be doing datatyping, right? I 
mean, by mandate, in our charter. So even though existing code may 
decide to ignore it, surely we are obliged to take it more seriously.

Re second paragraph.  I have to say, if the RDF community is 
expecting that strings and URIs are a sufficient basis for knowledge 
exchange, then its time the RDF community  stepped out into the real 
world for a while. Come on, you can't be serious, surely? For 
example, numbers are *really* handy, you know?


IHMC					(850)434 8903   home
40 South Alcaniz St.			(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola,  FL 32501			(850)202 4440   fax
Received on Tuesday, 29 January 2002 12:17:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:53:54 UTC