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

RE: incomplete datatyping (was: Re: datatypes and MT)

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 12:59:06 -0000
To: <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <JAEBJCLMIFLKLOJGMELDGEGOCCAA.jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
> Ahhh... here's where it gets really interesting...
> Do we mirror this derived type definition in the RDFS defined
> class hierarchy? I.e., do we need to define xsd:integer and
> xsd:string as a subClassOf xxx:size, so that folks can
> define values such as [ rdf:value "1"; rdf:type xsd:integer ]
> for properties with a range of xxx:size?
> Or should an RDF/RDFS engine testing range constraints also
> be an XML Schema data type engine able to parse and understand
> native XML Schema derived type defintions?

My proposed XML Schema/RDF Schema/RDF integration is showing in the examples
I sent an hour ago:


Basically the XML Schema sits in one file, and the RDF or RDFS refers to it
in some way (e.g. using its URL or using xsi:schemaLocation).

In this framework RDFS *does not* duplicate any of the mechanisms of XML
Schema but merely uses them (in external XML Schema files).

This is me trying to play by the charter; we might want to conclude that
this is sufficiently messy that the charter should be interpreted more

Received on Wednesday, 7 November 2001 07:59:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:24:06 UTC