Re: changes on rdf:text on the remaining Ed notes

Sandro Hawke wrote:
>> Alan Ruttenberg wrote:
>>> Hi Axel,
>>>
>>> What are the plans for the namespace for these functions? I'm
>>> concerned any resolution of that will delay publication of the
>>> document, and OWL plans to go to CR in the not to distant future and
>>> has a dependency on it I'd like to minimize risk on that.
>>>
>>> Have you considered moving these functions out of the rdf:text
>>> specification and into RIF instead?
>> I am reluctant on this one, to be honest: These functions are not 
>> RIF-functions but XQuery/XPath style functions. So, I don't see why and 
>> in which RIF spec they should go.
>>
>> I agree that "hijacking" the fn namespace is problematic. Can we give it 
>> our own namespace? e.g. analogously to
>>
>> fn: http://www.w3.org/2005/xpath-functions
>>
>> we could use
>>
>> rdftfn: http://www.w3.org/2009/rdftext-functions
>>
>> That would be the simplest solution, IMO.
> 
> How awkward would to be to leave this undefined?  These URLs are never
> used in RIF, and before they could be used in XPath, they'd have to be
> adopted by the appropriate WGs, which could put them into the 2005
> namespace, I think.  (Or maybe not -- I don't know the XPath
> extensibility story.  Do any of us know how these URLs are supposed to
> be used?)

I guess by future XPath/XQuery implementations that support rdf:text?
Not sure, but I'd definitly find it awkward to leave it open, i.e. you'd 
suggest to have a standard document which is inherently incomplete and 
says, that future standards will complete it (by defining the resp. 
namespace)?

Axel

>     -- Sandro


-- 
Dr. Axel Polleres
Digital Enterprise Research Institute, National University of Ireland, 
Galway
email: axel.polleres@deri.org  url: http://www.polleres.net/

Received on Sunday, 5 April 2009 21:34:07 UTC