- From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2001 16:35:06 +0000
- To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- CC: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org, pfps@research.bell-labs.com
Dan Connolly wrote:
[...]
>
> <rdf:Description rdf:about="#me">
> <shoeSize>
> <integer decimalRep="10"/>
> </shoeSize>
> </rdf:Description>
>
> To fill in the details... let dt:
> be the namespace of XML Schema primitive datatypes,
> and let rdfs:str be a new property
> that relates XML Schema datatype to strings;
> it's unambiguous over each of the primitive datatypes;
> in the case of dt:string, it's the identity relation.
>
> <rdf:Description rdf:about="#me">
> <shoeSize>
> <dt:decimal rdfs:str="10"/>
> </shoeSize>
> </rdf:Description>
This isn't the same as above is it? In your first example I could have extended
it to read:
<rdf:Description rdf:about="#me">
<shoeSize>
<integer decimalRep="10" hexadecimalrep="A"/>
</shoeSize>
</rdf:Description>
I don't seem to be able to do that with your second example. Are there
advantages to that which you have written over:
<rdf:Description rdf:about="#me">
<shoeSize dt:decimal="10"/>
</rdf:Description>
or if you want the type property explicit, we need to invent a URI for the value
space of the xsd datatype:
<rdf:Description rdf:about="#me">
<shoeSize>
<eg:integer dt:decimal="10"/>
</shoeSize>
</rdf:Description>
Brian
Received on Saturday, 3 November 2001 11:39:39 UTC