- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: 23 Aug 2002 09:00:18 -0500
- To: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Some review comments on http://www-nrc.nokia.com/sw/rdf-datatyping.html Last Modified: 19 August 2002 Hmm... 'datatyping'? it's a verb? I'd rather something like Using Primitive Datatyps in RDF The editors are listed as: Pat Hayes, Sergey Melnik, Patrick Stickler, Have they all looked at it? Maybe there should be an asterisk or something by the folks that haven't read it yet. The introductory text (abstract, status, introduction, desiderata) look like they haven't gotten much attention for a while, so I'm not reviewing them closely. The verbification of datatype shows up in "1.1 What is Datatyping?" again, though. | RDF literals are structured objects consisting of | a string, which is optionally qualified as | XML content (rdf:parseType equal to "Literal") | and/or having an associated xml:lang value I think this view of literals is confusing people; as I have said in discussion of the model theory, I think it's less confusing to explain it so that literals are a union of string string-with-lang XML infoitem XML info-item-with lang | The conceptual framework for RDF datatyping | presented in this specification is compatable | with the type system defined by XML Schema | for both simple and complex datatypes. Complex datatypes??? We don't even handle facets on the primitive types, let alone complex types. Hmm... but this doesn't look like a typo; there's further discussion of the concept and even an example. I'm not interested in this aspect of the design. I'd rather it were left out. | For an XML Schema complex datatype, its value | space is the set of all valid infosets licensed | by its content model and its datatype mapping | is the mapping from each XML serialization to | its corresponding infoset. Really? Which part of the XML Schema spec does that come from? Please cite it by section. | 3.2 Global Datatyping verbification again. | Global datatyping leaves the datatype of the | property value implicit which property? Ill-formed definite descriptions are a major pet-pieve of mine. The use of rdf:type with values of datatypes seems to complicate life considerably... You seem to be using the entailment... ex:age rdfs:range xsd:integer . Jane ex:age "25" . ==> "25" rdf:type xsd:integer which makes a certain amount of sense (though I don't think it follows from current model theory drafts, because of the literal in the subject position), but note that "25" might get related to any number of classes by the rdf:type property this way. Does the model theory in this spec handle all those cases? Hmm... the model theory seems to use rdfs:range directly, rather than using the rdf:type conclusion that follows from rdfs:range... so it won't work with stuff like DAML+OIL restrictions. I see section 6.1.3 DAML+OIL doesn't have much stuff in it. Consider something like :Person rdfs:label "Person"; rdfs:subClassOf [ ont:onProperty :age; ont:toClass xsdt:integer; ]. I gather the DAML+OIL crowd expects to be able to do stuff like that. And it won't work with this model theory, because the DAML restriction stuff goes right past rdfs:range to rdf:type. Well... that's all for now. Time for the telcon. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Friday, 23 August 2002 10:00:19 UTC