DTB status (on today's agenda)

Dear all,

since DTB status is on the agenda today, I basically want to clarify in 
the call today the following issues. I was anyway a bit occupied with 
other things, but basically, I am still stuck, as long as these issues 
are open, because any switch on them would mean unnecessary additional 
work on editing over the whole document (as opposed doing it in one go 
when they are clarified).


1) As for CURIEs, is [1] a proposal which woulc achieve a majority?
I would like it. I postponed further editing before the CURIE issues is 
solved or before at least it was discussed in the Telconf., since I 
don't want to change everything back again, when we decide something.

I suggest to

PROPOSE: Adopt the CURIE proposals of [1] for RIF's presentation syntax.

2) In any case which FULL URIs should I take for RIF builtins which come 
from XPAth/XQuery?

The following options exist:

a) define own prefixes (separate for functions and predicates):



b) define own prefix (same for functions and predicates):



c) reuse XPath/Xquery fn: prefix (problem: not prefix defined for op: we 
still would need to invent one):



d) use the URIs in the XPath, XQuery document:



e) an older proposal was to use actually symbol spaces for 
builtin-functions and -predicates


I personally prefer a) and suggest to

PROPOSE: We define own namespace prefixes
   PREFIX("pred", "http://www.w3.org/2007/rif-builtin-predicates#").
   PREFIX("func", "http://www.w3.org/2007/rif-builtin-functions#").
for RIF builtin functions and predicates

3) Treatment of errors, two alternatives (basically, fine for me to go 
with option a) just istign the older one for historical reasons)

Following the resolution we forget about err values from XPath/XQuery 
and treat errors as suggested by michael, e.g.:



i.e. on erroneous outcomes of the underlying XPath/Xquery function is 
undefined, i.e. the truth value of the function is left unspecified and 
can vary from one semantic structure to another.

In an earlier version of DTB, I had defined the XPath err: as a special 
symbol space with a fixed interpretation:


and had suggested to carry over error values for functions, e.g.

We need no proposal for 3) since it is covered by the resolution from 
Paris, yes? I.e. we don't specify error values and thus don't make a 


If we can fix these issue, I can continue on DTB. As long as these are 
moving targets, I feel at the moment quite uncomfortable to touch the 


[1] Sandro's final CURIE proposal: 

Dr. Axel Polleres, Digital Enterprise Research Institute (DERI)
email: axel.polleres@deri.org  url: http://www.polleres.net/

rdfs:Resource owl:differentFrom xsd:anyURI .

Received on Tuesday, 29 April 2008 14:52:48 UTC