- From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
- Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 10:19:44 +0300
- To: "ext Dan Brickley" <danbri@w3.org>, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
- Cc: thabing@uiuc.edu
Thanks for the pointer Dan. I was about to reply directly to Thomas on this. I can very much appreciate the utility that would be afforded XML Schema users in being able to express local datatyping using xsi:type, but there remain several questions about its use that have not been clarified: 1. Must the datatype identified by xsi:type conform to the XML Schema specification? Some preliminary research I've done to determine this shows a strong perception that this is true. Yet RDF datatyping should work equally well for any arbitrary datatype which conforms to the minimal characteristics defined by RDF, including but not limited to XML Schema datatypes. 2. Will the XML Schema WG/community have a problem with RDF adopting xsi:type as a key term in its own vocabulary if that means extending or interpreting its semantics to apply to datatypes not bound by the XML Schema specs. I suspect not. 3. Is introducing this co-dependency between the two standards absolutely necessary? One could easily construct a generic tool that incorporates an XML Schema validator and which validates typed literals in RDF/XML instances without parsing the RDF/XML into a graph. Given the other aspects of RDF validation, as well as those of upper layers such as OWL, I expect that in the long term, validation will be performed on the graph, not on the XML, and so any utility derived from adopting xsi:type would be limited and short lived. While I'm very sympathetic to easy validation of RDF/XML containing XML Schema datatyped literals, I don't think it is advisable to employ xsi:type, for the reasons outlined above. Cheers, Patrick _____________Original message ____________ Subject: Using XMLSchema-instance attributes in RDF/XML Syntax (fwd) Sender: ext Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org> Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 09:52:49 +0300 of interest re datatyping options... dan ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 16:20:31 -0500 From: Thomas G. Habing <thabing@uiuc.edu> To: www-rdf-interest@w3.org Subject: Using XMLSchema-instance attributes in RDF/XML Syntax Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 17:20:35 -0400 (EDT) Resent-From: www-rdf-interest@w3.org Hi all, I posted the following to www-rdf-comments recently, but it didn't generate any comments or followup, so I am posting here to see what happens :-). Does what I am proposing make sense, is it too simplistic, or am I just missing something? --- I have been trying to figure out how I can use the various XMLSchema-instance attributes (especially xsi:type, but also xsi:nil, xsi:schemaLocation, etc.) in an RDF/XML document. I want to create valid RDF/XML, but at the same time I want to be able to validate at least portions of the RDF/XML using XML Schema. Some of my XML Schemas require the use of the xsi:type attribute in the instance documents in order to validate. However, RDF insists on treating these xsi:attributes as RDF property attributes which causes the RDF to be invalid. I can understand this in the original RDF M&S since it predates XML Schema by a year or so, but I am surprised to see no mention of this issue in the newest "RDF/XML Syntax Specification." I have seen some of the discussions in the various lists of using xsi:type for data typing in RDF. I don't claim to understand most of the issues associated with this, but I would like to humbly suggest that at the very least there should be some language in the "RDF/XML Syntax Specification" to the effect that attributes in the XMLSchema-instance namespace should be ignored by RDF parsers, similar to what is done with the xml* attributes. Thanks, Tom -- Thomas Habing Research Programmer, Digital Library Projects University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign 155 Grainger Engineering Library Information Center, MC-274 thabing@uiuc.edu, (217) 244-4425 http://dli.grainger.uiuc.edu
Received on Wednesday, 21 August 2002 03:22:01 UTC