W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > August 2007

Re: Stymied on namespaceDocument-8

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 10:43:45 -0500
To: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
Cc: www-tag@w3.org
Message-Id: <1187711025.29837.961.camel@pav>

On Tue, 2007-08-21 at 11:30 -0400, Norman Walsh wrote:
[...]
> 3. Because the range is broad and the definitions aren't observable
> facts, there's no precedent for inventing new values.
> 
> I have some sympathy for this last point. I have a long standing
> action item with the XSL/XML Query WGs to produce a RDDL document for
> the XPath 2.0 Functions and Operators namespace document. I've been
> waiting for the TAG issue to be resolved partly because I imagined
> that its resolution would involve inventing a few more natures and
> purposes, specifically in my case, ones for the nature 'XPath
> function' and the purpose 'computing a result'.

For that particular case, it seems straightforward to
say:

  fn:base-uri rdf:type owl:FunctionalProperty.

or:

  fn:base-uri rdf:type xpath:Function.
  xpath:Function rdfs:subClassOf owl:FunctionalProperty.

It's not clear to me that anything
more needs to be said about 'computing a result'.


-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Tuesday, 21 August 2007 15:44:02 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:47 GMT