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

RE: DATATYPES: mental dump.

From: <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2001 22:10:10 +0200
Message-ID: <2BF0AD29BC31FE46B78877321144043162174A@trebe003.NOE.Nokia.com>
To: pfps@research.bell-labs.com, connolly@w3.org
Cc: phayes@ai.uwf.edu, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org

> If there is no reasonable implementation of XML Schema, then 
> it might be
> necessary to produce a stopgap solution that incorporates only the
> primitive datatypes, but this should be compatible with a complete
> solution.

I'm concerned with terms such as "incorporates" such that we
would be defining an explicit, official data type scheme for RDF
which all data type schemes are mapped to.

I would be very wary of any solution which did not work equally
well for non-XML Schema data type schemes as it does for XML
Schema data type schemes. Surely we want to keep a light coupling
(if any at all) between RDF and XML Schema.

It's one thing to support XML Schema data types. It's another
to require them.

Eh? Or am I reading too much into such statements...?

Received on Monday, 12 November 2001 15:10:27 UTC

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