- From: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 09:10:12 -0600
- To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
>On Mon, 2002-12-09 at 18:35, pat hayes wrote: >> >> >I'm not comfortable with the SHOULD in >> > >> >"A 'datatype-aware' RDF engine SHOULD be competent to recognize at >> >least the rdfs:XMLLiteral datatype and the set of all the XML >> >Schema primitive datatypes." >> > >> >insofar as XML Schema datatypes are concerned. >> > >> >I think the SHOULD should only be limited to rdfs:XMLLiteral. >> > >> >I don't believe this is an editorial issue. I don't believe that the >> >WG has agreed that this expectation should be placed on datatype >> >savvy applications. >> > >> >I propose the following rewording: >> > >> >"A 'datatype-aware' RDF engine SHOULD be competent to recognize at >> >least the rdfs:XMLLiteral datatype. It MAY, and typically will, >> >recognize other datatypes, >> >such as the XML Schema built-in simple datatypes." >> >> On reflection, I don't think we should shilly-shally with 'typically' >> when using this strict language, so Ive simplified this to: >> >> A 'datatype-aware' RDF engine SHOULD be competent to recognize at >> least the built-in rdf:XMLLiteral datatype. It MAY also recognize the >> set of all the XML Schema built-in datatypes. >> >> >> OK?? > >no; 'RDF engine' seems completely out of place. >Please strike all mentions of it. I don't see how that is possible. When talking about datatypes we are forced into talking about information 'inside' RDF and information coming from 'outside'. The 'side' that these words are referring to is the boundary of a hypothetical RDF reasoning engine. I note that the XML spec makes a similar reference to a hypothetical XML parser, and it does not seem inappropriate there. Pat -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- IHMC (850)434 8903 home 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax FL 32501 (850)291 0667 cell phayes@ai.uwf.edu http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes s.pam@ai.uwf.edu for spam
Received on Tuesday, 10 December 2002 10:10:17 UTC