W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > May 2001

RE: Example problem with QNames and RDF was: Re: QName Problem Isn't One

From: Danny Ayers <danny@panlanka.net>
Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 11:38:05 +0600
To: "RDF Interest" <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Message-ID: <EBEPLGMHCDOJJJPCFHEFEEEEDFAA.danny@panlanka.net>
The only drawback of the examples is that they describe how a stylesheet may
be applied to XML and don't really deal with the RDF model. You do start
down this path with the entertaining "close enough for government work"
angle.

What I'd like to see is examples of RDF & RDF schema with reference to the
following : 1. how a parser would deal with the use of the XML Schema
namespace in RDF (particularly a schema-validating one); 2. how an
application might interpret the result of such a parse to take advantage of
the types found in XML Schema.

If both 1. and 2. can be done in a manner consistent with the RDF spec then
I'd say we have a winner - if not, maybe we'd see where the problem lies. I
won't supply examples myself as I lack the confidence in the technique
expressed by certain correspondents (and am terminally lazy) - but I hope it
will work, at least without too much kludging.

---
Danny Ayers
http://www.isacat.net

>-----Original Message-----
>From: www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org
>[mailto:www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Jonathan Borden
>Sent: 07 May 2001 23:08
>To: Brian McBride
>Cc: RDF Interest
>Subject: Example problem with QNames and RDF was: Re: QName Problem
>Isn't One
>
>
>Brian,
>
>First a very simple example:
>
>The task assigned is to create an XSLT transform which adds 1 to the number
>represented by the value of an element qualified by the XML Schema
>namespace
>with a local name "decimal" (i.e. "xsd:decimal"), a fragment of this
>
><xsl:stylesheet xmlns:xsl="..."
>        xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"
>>
>
>...
>
><xsl:template match="xsd:decimal">
>    <xsd:decimal>
>        <xsl:value-of select="1 + number(text())"/>
>    </xsd:decimal>
></xsl:template>
>
>At this point several people are probably wildly waving their arms
>suggesting that we use a different namespace URI in RDF applications.
>
>My response is: if you care about interoperability with XML and XML Schema,
>then you need the QNames to match because QNames are how datatypes are
>refered to in XML, and QNames are how elements and attributes are
>matched in
>XPath and on and on.
>
>If you don't care about XML compatibility, then why use XML Schema
>datatypes? What to people hope to accomplish by this in the
>absence of using
>XML and XML related software?
>
>Of course we can do the following:
>
><xsl:stylesheet
>    xmlns:fubar="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#"
>>
><xsl:template match="fubar:decimal">
>...
>
>but just as easily I can do:
>
><xsl:template match="rdf_datatype:decimal">
>
>if we aren't going to use the _same datatypes_ then why confuse
>the heck out
>of people.
>
>An analogy would be to the difference between the numbers:
>
><xsd:decimal>99.9999999999999999</xsd:decimal>
>
>and
>
><xsd:int>100</xsd:int>
>
>sure they are close, but is anyone really suggesting that these two values
>are the same? If you consider two namespaces close enough as they only
>differ by a single character, that's akin to asserting a
>[daml:equivalentTo,
>xsd:decimal, xsd:int] which might be fine for the IRS but might cause
>problems for NASA.
>
>(for non-US citizens, that is a play on the phrase: "close enough for
>government work")
>
>-Jonathan
>
>
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 8 May 2001 01:42:24 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:49 GMT