W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > December 1999

Re: A weird question?

From: Dan Brickley <Daniel.Brickley@bristol.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 13:52:59 +0000 (GMT)
To: Sankar Virdhagriswaran <sv@crystaliz.com>
cc: "'xml-dev'" <xml-dev@ic.ac.uk>, www-rdf-interest <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.GHP.4.21.9912231344520.21487-100000@mail.ilrt.bris.ac.uk>
On Thu, 23 Dec 1999, Sankar Virdhagriswaran wrote:

> > There are also quite a few people are interested in reflecting the
> > dataypes component of XML Schema into the RDF data model; I think that
> should be
> 
> This is an interesting idea. The flow I would see would be the other way
> around however. One would describe the XML-Schema descriptions in RDF from
> which the XML-Schema descriptions are generated. This approach would fit
> with the way folks today use modeling tools such as UML.

This would also be interesting, but is at the instance-data level,
ie. we're talking slightly cross purposes. When I talk about reflecting
from XML into RDF, I meant the constructs defined in the XML datatype
spec (facets etc) not particular application schemas or data valid by
those schemas.

At the W3C spec level, RDF deferred datatyping issues so they could be
dealt with once and for all across all XML apps by XML Schema. Now we
(more or less) have this, it is natural to explore a mapping of the
concepts defined in XML datatypes spec into RDF data graphs. Once some
mapping has been established, applications should be able to go both
ways, ie. first we reflect the XML datatype machinery into an
RDF-processsable representation, _then_ we can (hopefully) reflect
datatyped XML information into RDF and vice-versa.  

Dan
Received on Thursday, 23 December 1999 08:54:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:42 GMT