W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-comments@w3.org > January to March 2003

Re: Comments on RDF last call working drafts

From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 12:31:23 +0000
Message-Id: <>
To: "Butler, Mark" <Mark_Butler@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, "'www-rdf-comments@w3.org'" <www-rdf-comments@w3.org>
Cc: "'Java Community Process JSR #188 Expert List'" <JSR-188-EG@JCP.ORG>, "'w3c-ccpp-wg@w3.org'" <w3c-ccpp-wg@w3.org>, WAP-UAPROF@MAIL.OPENMOBILEALLIANCE.ORG

Mark and Colleagues,

Thank you for taking the time to review RDFCore's documents and provide 

Your comment has been recorded as


The WG will consider your comment and you will hear further from us in due 

I note your concerns with local datatyping as:

   a) it uses up more network bandwidth.
   b) you are concerned about inconsistency

Concerning a:

   - is there a quantative assessment of the impact on bandwidth
   - has the use of entity declarations to provide a more compact 
representation been considered
   - has the use of DTD default attributes to provide a more compact 
representation been considered

Concerning b:

   - could you provide an example of the sort of inconsistency you are 
concerned about.


At 14:46 18/02/2003 +0000, Butler, Mark wrote:

>Dear Colleagues:
>JSR-188, the Java Specification Request for CC/PP processing,
>has examined the RDF last call working drafts published on the 23rd of
>January 2003. First, we commend the RDF WG for excellent work, and
>congratulate you on bringing your REC to last call. However we would like to
>raise an issue with the documents, concerning the adoption of local
>datatyping. Here we use the term "local datatyping" and "global datatyping"
>as proposed by Mike Dean
>We agree with Mike's comments. Specifically the JSR-188 Expert Group would
>like to suggest that CC/PP definitely need "global" datatyping not "local"
>datatyping. As CC/PP is based on RDF, this means that RDF should provide
>some mechanism for global data typing. Adopting local datatyping will make
>CC/PP profiles unnecessarily verbose using up valuable network bandwidth. As
>one early adopter of CC/PP is UAProf which is aimed at wireless phone
>networks, profile verbosity is of a particular concern. In addition as Mike
>notes local datatyping also increases the potential for inconsistencies,
>which we found to be a considerable problem in the deployment of CC/PP and
>Furthermore, we anticipate that local datatyping, which is clearly the wrong
>choice for CC/PP, will also be the wrong choice for other applications of
>RDF which require either
>1. require RDF/XML to be entered by hand, due to the increased risk of
>inconsistencies or
>2. for RDF/XML documents to be exchanged within protocols, due to increased
>document verbosity.
>Therefore we would like to raise the issue that we think the RDF core
>working group should reconsider its position on datatyping.
>Mark Butler, Hewlett Packard
>Luu Tran, Sun Microsystems
>Andreas Schade, IBM
>Jason Williams
>Reto Hermann, IBM
>Rotan Hanrahan
>Stan Wiechers
>Steve Geach, Elata plc
Received on Wednesday, 19 February 2003 07:30:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:15:20 UTC