- From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
- Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2002 17:27:15 +0200
- To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- CC: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>, RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>, Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
On 2002-02-15 17:03, "ext Dan Connolly" <connolly@w3.org> wrote: >> Do to RDF datatyping, you have three choices: > > Again, argument by assertion. > > I have a choice to use S-B whether this WG > endorses it or not. If this WG endorses > it, I'm likely to get more interoperability; > I'd like that. The S-B idiom is not RDF datatyping. It is external-application specific datatyping because nowhere in the RDF graph are the datatypes of S-B idiom literals defined. Patrick -- Patrick Stickler Phone: +358 50 483 9453 Senior Research Scientist Fax: +358 7180 35409 Nokia Research Center Email: patrick.stickler@nokia.com
Received on Friday, 15 February 2002 10:26:08 UTC