- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 13:43:30 -0000
- To: <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Brian dropped by and asked me what the key differences between S and TDL were. Here is a list: ** A single triple: <bob> <age> "30" . In S "30" is a string, in TDL it is untyped. ** Range constraints for this triple. In S-B the range constraint is something like: <age> <rdfs:range> <xsd:integer.lex> . whereas in TDL (using the .map prefix that is not part of TDL) we would have: <age> <rdfs:range> <xsd:integer.map> . ** The role of the map, the lexical space, the value space. S makes strong distinctions between these. TDL always uses the map as representing the datatype (and then does not use the .map extenstion). ** syntactic stylistic The local idiom D and the local idiom S-A are different syntaxes, roughly meaning the same thing. D has better compatibility with DAML. ** interaction of multiple different lexicalizations with possibly multiply different types. S-A is strong S-B is weak TDL is in between. (An example is when we have two integer dataypes one with binary lexicalization and one with decimal lexicalization). S-B allows "100" with both types as legal (despite two different values to the application) S-A allows "100" as legal and the syntax forces disambiguation of one type or the other, S-A also allows compatible lexicalizations [eg:binary "100" ] [ eg:deciaml "4" ] on the same node. TDL detects a type conflict and rejects a document trying to give "100" both types. Jeremy
Received on Friday, 25 January 2002 08:43:32 UTC