Re: Action 299 - removing sorts

Sandro Hawke wrote:
> kifer@cs.sunysb.edu (Michael Kifer) writes:
>   
>>>> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/track/actions/299 has been completed.  Part
>>>> of the title of this action says: "handle datatypes as in RDF."  This was
>>>> *not* what was resolved at the F2F and was put in there by mistake (I
>>>> hope).  Certainly, I would not have agreed to such an action, since I do
>>>> not know what this might mean in logic.
>>>>         
>>> As I recall, by that point of the meeting we were in something of a
>>> hurry, and people were talking over each other, so I guess I can
>>> understand how you missed this.  In general, there should be a pause and
>>> people should double check on IRC to make sure their action is recorded
>>> in a way they are comfortable with.  It sounds like there was a process
>>> error in not making sure we did that.
>>>
>>> There was not a clerical error in drafting that action, however -- I
>>> proposed that wording to match my understanding of group consensus.
>>>
>>> Specifically, I heard people saying we still needed some kind of "sort"
>>> thing for data values, and general murmurs that what RDF has is fine.
>>>
>>> As I understand it, RDF Semantics just formalizes the notion in XML
>>> Schema that a string like "3" or "2001-01-01" is a lexical
>>> representation of some individual in a "value space" (the number three,
>>> or the day Jan 1, 2001), and that a datatype URI identifies a mapping
>>> from these lexical representations to values.
>>>       
>> I am not sure what does it have to do with RDF, but it all you meant "data
>> types" then yes, it is there.
>>     
>
> Well, I think different people have different ideas about what "data
> types" might mean.   So I included the phrase "as in RDF" to try to
> clarify that.

[...]

There is a W3C WG Note on XML Schema Datatypes in RDF and OWL at

http://www.w3.org/TR/swbp-xsch-datatypes/.

Jeff


-- 

Dr. Jeff Z. Pan (http://www.csd.abdn.ac.uk/~jpan/)
Department of Computing Science, The University of Aberdeen

Received on Wednesday, 18 July 2007 10:22:30 UTC