RDF datatyping should allow the form: http://example.org#foo http://example.org#prop "<this>is some structured XML</this>"^^http://example.org/SomeSchema#myType where http://example.org/SomeSchema#myType identifies the XML datatype: element this{text} Similarly RDF/XML should provide for: <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://example.org#foo"> <ex:prop rdf:datatype="http://example.org/SomeSchema#myType"> <this>is some structured XML</this> </ex:prop> </rdf:Description> 1. There is no compelling reason to prohibit this given the current RDF datatyping solution for which this is a minor modification to the syntax. 2. Allowing this will be very useful for OWL which needs to deal with structured datatypes 3. Despite the face that XML Schema does not _automatically_ provide for URIs for schema particles, when it does in the future, and when one explicitly assigns a URIref to an XML Schema particle, this solution will be most useful. 3a. The failure of XML Schema to provide URIs should not arbitrarily limit RDF datatypes. Indeed such a failure will arbitrarily limit future RDF and XML Schema datatype interoperability -- 2 specifications would need to be fixed not just one -- both the current XML Schema REC and the new RDF REC -- there wouldn't be so much reason for XML Schema to provide URIs for complex datatypes since RDF wouldn't be able to use them. JonathanReceived on Tuesday, 29 October 2002 07:42:27 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 18:22:15 GMT