Re: rdf:datatype v xsi:type

Jeremy Carroll wrote:

>

snip

> 
> I don't think there are any killers here.
> In particularly I disagree with Patrick when he raises non-XSD types - 
> simply out of scope as far as I am concerned.

I guess I don't understand this "out of scope" comment.  You may not 
care about referring to non-XSD types (I do), but considering them was 
certainly "in scope" as far as making the "rdf:datatype" decision was 
concerned.  If you'd like to revisit the "what datatypes we're prepared 
to reference" question, I suppose we can do that [Brian screams "NO" and 
pounds his head against the wall], but it ought not to be considered 
just a matter of syntax.  Considering that all we're doing is indicating 
the name of the type the literal is supposed to be associated with, what 
difference does it really make?

--Frank




-- 
Frank Manola                   The MITRE Corporation
202 Burlington Road, MS A345   Bedford, MA 01730-1420
mailto:fmanola@mitre.org       voice: 781-271-8147   FAX: 781-271-875

Received on Wednesday, 16 October 2002 07:08:26 UTC