- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: 14 Mar 2003 11:51:38 -0600
- To: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
EricM and everybody, as part of last call review of our datatype design, did we ask the XML Schema WG to make an RDF schema available at http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-datatypes and/or at http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema ? I think we should; i.e. W3C should endorse the use of these names as datatypes by putting some RDF there that says they're datatypes. Something like what Patrick put together... http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Nov/0654.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Nov/att-0654/01-XSD.rdf I still prefer to think that datatype subtyping works more like subProperty than like subClassOf; e.g. xsdt:long rdfs:subPropertyOf xsdt:integer. is a better way of looking at it than xsdt:long rdfs:subClassOf xsdt:integer. But I'm not all *that* uncomfortable using datatypes both as properties (whose extensions relate values to lexical forms) and as classes (of values). Note XQuery is using http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-datatypes as a namespace prefix for a vocabulary of constructors. http://www.w3.org/TR/xquery-operators/#namespace-prefix These constructors act an awful lot like RDF properties, if you ask me. consider... 8.4.7.1 Examples * fn:get-year-from-dateTime(xs:dateTime("1999-05-31T13:20:00-05:00")) returns 1999. it looks very natural as... [ is xs:dateTime of "1999-05-31T13:20:00-05:00" ] fn:get-year-from-dateTime 1999. (assuming N3 grows integer literals). -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Friday, 14 March 2003 12:50:32 UTC