W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > January 2010

Re: Datatyping

From: Jeremy Carroll <jeremy@topquadrant.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 13:41:11 -0800
Message-ID: <4B577877.2010808@topquadrant.com>
To: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
CC: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>, Graham Klyne <GK-lists@ninebynine.org>, Harry Halpin <hhalpin@ibiblio.org>, semantic-web@w3.org

"That suggests zero evolvability of RDF."

If we reopen the datatyping can of worms the vote might split 70/30 the 
other way this time; and ...
then next time round it might be 40/60 back again.

I'm trying to thing of an equivalent evolution ... there was XML DTD to 
Schema ....

With RDF 1 as specified, it is possible to define your own semantic 
extension which includes interpretation properties.
I guess I would like to see success with this before adding such 
interpretation properties to the spec.
But I am not quite sure what I would mean by success.


>> I don't think 100% compatibility is enough. Adding a second mechanism 
>> will simply add to confusion.
>> This was considered and rejected by the earlier group, even if that 
>> decision with hindsight was not brilliant (it was a 50/50 split).
>> I preferred the other design, but I have to learn to live with the one 
>> we agreed.
> That suggests zero evolvability of RDF.  
Received on Wednesday, 20 January 2010 21:41:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:48:05 UTC