- 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