Re: email straw poll: literal semantics proposals

On Mon, 2002-10-07 at 17:39, Brian McBride wrote:
[...]
> Proposal B:
[...]
> The object of an age property denotes a string literal [*] from the lexical 
> space of xsd:integer.

works for me.

4.

(like Graham, I think I'd rather endorse
InterpretationProperties/datatype properties
while we're at it. But since that can be done
later, and the whole point of this proposal
is to be minimal, it's not critical.)

> Proposal C:
[...]
> The object of the age property denotes a member of the value space of 
> xsd:integer.  The object of the title property denotes a string literal[*].

3

I kinda like this, but I'm afraid there's quite a lot of details
to work out with rdf:datatype

> Proposal D:
[...]
> Proposal D is proposal C with some syntactic sugar (the rdf:datatype 
> declaration) so that it is not necessary to put an rdf:datatype attribute 
> on every use of the age property.

0

This is gonna clash (unacceptably) badly with existing RDF parsers
and with what knowledge users have managed to pick up about RDF
syntax.

> Proposal F:
[...]
> The object of an age property denotes an integer from the value space of 
> xsd:decimal.

0

Costs too much to deploy; undermines the connection between
existing data and existing software.


-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/