Re: RDFCore WG: Datatyping documents

Patrick Stickler wrote:

> On 2002-01-28 17:42, "ext Jonathan Borden" <jborden@mediaone.net> wrote:
>
> > Patrick Stickler wrote:
>
> You're missing my question. If the URI is the *correct* URI,
> not a new one, not one with redefined semantics, but the actual,
> single XML Schema defined URI for the datatype, would that be
> OK?

If you are using the defined URI _and assuming the defined semantics_ then
certainly that would be "OK"

HOWEVER

When you state:

rdfdt:integer daml:equivalentTo xsd:integer

You effectively equate the entire RDF DT and XML Schema datatype
"ontologies" unless you are careful (and let me know precisely how you solve
this problem).

Said another way: "equivalent semantics" implies:

RDF DT "semantics" = XML Schema "semantics" (i.e.
http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-formal/)

Or peraps you mean "XQuery 1.0 formal semantics"
http://www.w3.org/TR/query-semantics/ or "XQuery 1.0 data model"
http://www.w3.org/TR/query-datamodel/

What is the relationship between the RDF DT model and these formal models? I
think it is important to answer this question because alot of very pertinent
and good work has gone into the documents I reference (IMHO).

In any case: do you adopt these semantics?

Jonathan