W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > April 2003

RE: pfps-13 facets in datatypes

From: <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 10:46:20 +0300
Message-ID: <A03E60B17132A84F9B4BB5EEDE57957B01B90D03@trebe006.europe.nokia.com>
To: <jjc@hpl.hp.com>, <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>



> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Jeremy Carroll [mailto:jjc@hpl.hp.com]
> Sent: 22 April, 2003 14:23
> To: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
> Subject: pfps-13 facets in datatypes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMa
> r/0152.html
> [[
> So what happened to the XML Schema datatype facets?  Are they 
> part of RDF
> datatypes?
> ]]
> 
> Proposed response:
> 
> punt
> (This is neither an accept nor a reject, just close).
> plus some changes
> 
> OLD TEXT
> [[
> Datatypes are used by RDF in the representation of values 
> such as integers, 
> floating point numbers and dates.
> 
> RDF uses the datatype abstraction defined by XML Schema Part 
> 2: Datatypes 
> [XML-SCHEMA2], and may be used with any datatype definition 
> that conforms to 
> this abstraction, even if not actually defined in terms of XML Schema.
> 
> A datatype mapping is a set of pairs whose first element 
> belongs to the 
> lexical space of the datatype, and the second element belongs 
> to the value 
> space of the datatype:
> ]]
> 
> NEW TEXT (2nd para, 1st and 3rd para unchanged)
> [[
> RDF uses the datatype abstraction defined by XML Schema Part 
> 2: Datatypes 
> [XML-SCHEMA2]. 

The above text says to me that the definition of rdfs:Datatype
is identitical to the definition of a datatype in XML Schema,
which I think is where the misunderstandings about the "missing"
facets is coming from.

Perhaps some wording with even less rigorous ties to the actual 
definitions in the XML Schema specs:

"RDF uses a datatype abstraction compatible with that defined
by XML Schema Part 2: Datatypes [XML-SCHEMA2].  ..."

This then (hopefully) avoids a strong/literal interpretation that
the definition of RDF datatypes is *identical* to the definition
provided by XML Schema (which it is not, since the RDF datatype
abstraction is generalization of that defined by XML Schema,
albeit a fully compatible one).

> RDF be used with any datatype definition that conforms to the 
> following 
> abstraction, even if not actually defined in terms of XML Schema.
> ]]

Yup. Definitely keep this latter part.

 Patrick
Received on Wednesday, 23 April 2003 03:46:24 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:56:58 EDT