W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > December 2001

Re: In defense of S

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 07:28:25 -0600
Message-ID: <3C0E20F9.1398D30A@w3.org>
To: Sergey Melnik <melnik@db.stanford.edu>
CC: RDFCore WG <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Sergey Melnik wrote:
> Idiom B
> =======
> Another way of using datatype mappings is to define the range of a
> property as the *lexical space* of a datatype:
>   dc:date --rdfs:range--> [] <--rdfs:range-- xsd:duration

"the range of a property" is an ill-formed definite description;
a property can have lots different classes as ranges.
Not to mention that a bnode can't be the object of two
different statements in RDF/xml.

We can use this idiom if, as Graham suggested[1], we pick
names for "the lexical space of the xsd:duration datatype";
say, rdfd:durationLexicalSpace. Of course, once we pick
it, we would say
	xsd:duration rdfs:range rdfd:durationLexicalSpace.

I think Idiom B is much akin to PL[2]. I like the idea
	- we give names to all three (lexical, value, mapping)
	parts of each of the primitive datatypes

	- we explain how to use them (PL/S-B, S-A)

	- we let users choose

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Nov/0646.html

[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Dec/0003.html

Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Wednesday, 5 December 2001 08:28:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:24:07 UTC