- From: Dave Reynolds <der@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2007 08:41:01 +0100
- To: "Boley, Harold" <Harold.Boley@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca>
- Cc: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>, public-rif-wg@w3.org
Boley, Harold wrote: >> Why are you using "type" (eg rif:type) instead of xsi:type there? > > For uniformity reasons: rif:type is more general than xsi:type. > For example, we also have rif:type="rif:local". That's not a problem, xsi:type can be used to refer to any schema element including user defined ones and so can certainly be used to refer to one defined in a separate W3C spec. More significant is that the value of xsi:type is a QName whereas rif:type currently seems to be a curi. I'm happy to use rif:type attribute, seems like a good move to me. Dave -- Hewlett-Packard Limited Registered Office: Cain Road, Bracknell, Berks RG12 1HN Registered No: 690597 England
Received on Monday, 24 September 2007 07:41:13 UTC