Re: new version of rdf:O)-> document

From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
Subject: Re: new version of rdf:O)-> document 
Date: Fri, 29 May 2009 08:34:05 -0500

> 
>> >> (2) The introduction goes on to state that it "does not change the 
>> >> conceptual model of RDF". This is also not correct.
>> >>
>> >> At present an API working over RDF which is asked for the datatype of a 
>> >> plain literal should return the programming equivalent of "there isn't 
>> >> one". After the spec such an API should return "rdf:PlainLiteral". 
>> > 
>> > Is that true? 
>> 
>> Isn't it?  I've lost the plot on what the intention is.  You tell me 
>> what the working group intends to be the answer here.
> 
> I don't think we have an opinion, since it's an API issue.
> 
>> > My understanding is that it's really up the API and not
>> > something that has been standardized.  APIs were always free to do
>> > something like this before, and they're free to do something different
>> > even after this (hopefully) reaches Rec.  I guess Jena always tried to
>> > follow the ideas of the spec quite closely, but I don't think all RDF
>> > APIs did, or that the others were wrong for approaching the RDF data
>> > from a different angle.
>> 
>> Sure, that's why I used "should". There is no standardization of APIs so 
>> each is free to interpret how the formal specs should be manifested to 
>> the actual users.
>> 
>> That doesn't affect the fact that the conceptual model has changed and 
>> so APIs are likely to evolve to reflect this. This is hardly the end of 
>> the world. I just found it hard to accept the bald statement "does not 
>> change the conceptual model".

But the conceptual model has *not* changed.  At all!

>> The spec probably does the best that can be done to minimize the impact 
>> of the change on interoperability.
> 
> How about changing:
> 
>      This extension, however, does not change the conceptual model of
>      RDF, and thus does not affect the specifications that depend on the
>      conceptual model of RDF such as SPARQL
> 
> to:
> 
>      This extension adds an optional element to the conceptual model of
>      RDF, but does not require any changes to software or affect the
>      specifications that depend on the conceptual model of RDF such as
>      SPARQL.
> 
> ?
> 
>       - Sandro

I am against this change to the document.

peter

Received on Friday, 29 May 2009 13:38:41 UTC