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

Re: Action DanC? [was Re: More on XSD in RDF]

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: 25 Nov 2002 13:04:50 -0600
To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Cc: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>, ext Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <1038251090.5318.225.camel@dirk>

On Mon, 2002-11-25 at 12:41, Brian McBride wrote:
> At 10:15 25/11/2002 -0600, Dan Connolly wrote:
> >On Mon, 2002-11-25 at 09:42, Brian McBride wrote:
> >[...]
> > >    o I suggest:
> > >
> > >    - we use non controversial examples of schema datatypes in our test
> > > cases - stay away from the stuff that tests understanding of schema
> > > datatypes more than rdf
> >
> >As I explained earlier, I disagree with shying away from
> >contraversial issues that are relevant to our design, i.e.
> >keeping them out of the test suite.
> 
> I wasn't shying away from it, I was trying to avoid a last call dependency 
> on it.
> 
> However, you are pretty serious about this.

I'm serious about seeing that C/rdf:datatype
is done right, if it's done at all. You
will recall that it's not my preferred option.

I think that rdfs:format is a lot less work.

> It seems to me that what we need, as well as test cases, is an RDF Schema 
> for XML Schema datatypes.  If we are going to expect an xsd datatypes aware 
> processor to be aware of the class hierarchy,

???

where does that come from?

> someone should write down 
> definitively what it is.
> 
> DanC, would you be willing to take an action to:
> 
>    1 write an RDF Schema for XSD datatypes
>    2 Define a set of test cases to illustrate that schema and the datatype 
> entailment rules
>    3 Verify that RDF Schema and the test cases with the XML Schema folks
>    4 Bring the schema and test cases back to RDFCore for review


> Brian

-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Monday, 25 November 2002 14:05:54 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:54:10 EDT