Proposal to drop S from consideration

The S proposal adds unneeded machinery, seemingly requires 
redefinition of the semantics of rdfs:subPropertyOf in terms
of data type properties versus non-data type properties, and 
requires a treatment of data typing that is incompatible with 
current usage.

Furthermore, the S proposal is IMO generating more questions than
it strives to answer, and demands a non-trivial amount of further 
work to fully understand its potential impact on the present use and 
understanding of RDF.

Given that the goal of the WG is to clarify the current Recommendation, 
including the typing of literals in terms of the current Recommendation, 
then the S proposal seems to me to go well beyond the constraints of 
the charter, no matter how loosely one interprets it.

Changes which are as significant as those proposed by the S proposal
should be deferred to a future (major) version of RDF.

Therefore, I respectfully and humbly propose that the S proposal 
be dropped from consideration.

I further propose that a combination of the P proposal (not P++) and 
a modified form of the DC proposal (changing rdfs:label to rdfs:value, 
per the current DAML usage) be adopted, providing two (already commonly
used) means of pairing data type and resource, by typed anonymous node 
and/or rdfs:range implication. 

I.e.:

     SUBJ PRED _:OBJ .
     _:OBJ rdf:value "LIT" .
     _:OBJ rdf:type TYPE .

and/or

     SUBJ PRED "LIT" .
     PRED rdfs:range TYPE .

Which both define the pairing ("LIT",TYPE) which uniquely denotes
a value in the value space of TYPE.


Regards,

Patrick

--
               
Patrick Stickler              Phone: +358 50 483 9453
Senior Research Scientist     Fax:   +358 7180 35409
Nokia Research Center         Email: patrick.stickler@nokia.com



--
               
Patrick Stickler              Phone: +358 50 483 9453
Senior Research Scientist     Fax:   +358 7180 35409
Nokia Research Center         Email: patrick.stickler@nokia.com

Received on Thursday, 22 November 2001 03:08:55 UTC