W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-comments@w3.org > January to March 2002

Re: dataTypes and classification schemes

From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 10:53:02 +0000
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20020213104755.02261cc0@0-mail-1.hpl.hp.com>
To: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>, Roland Schwaenzl <roland@mathematik.uni-osnabrueck.de>
Cc: www-rdf-comments@w3.org
At 10:05 13/02/2002 +0000, Dave Beckett wrote:
> >>>Roland Schwaenzl said:
>
> > somewhere on the web i've seen
> >
> > <?xml version="1.0"?>
> >  <rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
> >              xmlns:rdfs="http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#"
> >              xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
> >              xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/">
> >  <rdf:Description>
> >   <dc:subject>
> >     <dcterms:MESH>
> >       <rdf:value>D08.586.682.075.400</rdf:value>
> >       <rdfs:label>Formate Dehydrogenase</rdfs:label>
> >     </dcterms:MESH>
> >   </dc:subject>
> >  </rdf:Description>
> >  </rdf:RDF>
> >
> >
> > I have received a message indicating, that such construction might
> > become illegal  or deprecated in a few weeks by W3C.
> > Would like some clarification by the WG on this. (I'm not 100% sure,
> > whether this question is related to the current dataTyping proposals.)
>
>
>As a member of the RDF Core working group, and not speaking for it, I
>can't see any of the above RDF/XML syntax that is going to be removed
>from the syntax, or illegal as you put it.
>
>However, the interpretation of the syntax may change - especially
>for rdf:value, since that was rather vaguely defined (by example only) in
>the RDF Model & Syntax document.


Sorry Roland, I've been checking with the datatyping guys.  I'd agree with 
Dave.  My two point answer would have been:

   o The WG will seek feedback from the community before any of its
     decisions are cast in stone

   o The folks looking at datatyping are considering using rdf:value.
     However, I'm pretty sure they will use a different property to ensure
     that they do not conflict with current usage.  Where you see
     rdf:value used in current discussions, its really a place holder.

So as far as I'm aware, there are no proposals that would result in your 
example becoming illegal.

Brian
Received on Wednesday, 13 February 2002 05:54:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 21 September 2012 14:16:30 GMT