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

Re: questions about rdfs:Datatype [Was: RE: Seeking normative definition of datatyping]

From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 10:36:29 +0200
Message-ID: <002901c29c39$69a51290$2c80720a@NOE.Nokia.com>
To: "ext Frank Manola" <fmanola@mitre.org>, "Roland Schwaenzl" <roland@mathematik.uni-osnabrueck.de>
Cc: <www-rdf-comments@w3.org>



[Patrick Stickler, Nokia/Finland, (+358 40) 801 9690, patrick.stickler@nokia.com]


> ...You should also note that the 
> "understanding"" of a datatype we talk about in RDF is far less than you 
> would expect for the "understanding" required for a datatype in a 
> programming language (where the set of operations associated with the 
> datatype must also be understood).

Just a short comment. There has been some discussion in the WG
about possibly defining explicit levels of "understanding" or "support"
for datatyping, to aid developers and users in determining
whether a given application provides sufficient support for 
particular content and anticipated operations.

One level, or aspect of a level, of support would be knowledge of
the full set of operations defined for the values of a given
datatype or intersection of datatypes.

C.f.
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Dec/0009.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Dec/0029.html

At the moment, though, Frank is quite right in that the degree
of understanding presumed for datatyping entailments, as captured
in the current drafts and test cases, is limited to equality, and 
not necessarily equality across datatypes in all cases.

Cheers,

Patrick
Received on Thursday, 5 December 2002 03:36:41 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 21 September 2012 14:16:31 GMT