- From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 18:33:39 +0100
- To: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>, RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
At 14:32 23/06/2002 +0300, Patrick Stickler wrote:
[...]
> >
> > <Jenny> <age> _:a .
> > _:a <xsdr:decimal> "10" .
>
>What is this 'xsdr:'? This should be 'xsd:decimal'.
Have we decided that we can use the standard xsd URI's for our datatype
properties and classes? Do they denote the same thing? I didn't think we
had so left the option open. Maybe I'm being too pernickity.
[...]
>Test A can be considered true regardless whether the objects are taken
>to be strings or values.
I'm not convinced that's true, but I'll deal with that in a separate post.
[...]
>You could add:
>
>And no datatype value is provided to any RDF application, only the
>string, and it is not specified at the RDF level what is meant by
>the string "10" -- i.e. whether Jenny's age actually is the number 10
>or (oddly but possibly) the string "10".
^^^^^
I'm trying to avoid advocacy here, but to ask the questions in an unbiased way.
[...]
>Note that the use of rdfs:range in this fashion follows from normal
>usage of RDF Schema semantics. I.e. this approach does not constitute
>an extension to RDF or RDF Schema in order to provide for global
>datatyping constraints.
I don't see that helps clarify the question.
[...]
>You might better make the choice between C and D, as their distinction
>is IMO clearer.
I prefer B to C.
[...]
>And the deadline for replies?
Good point - done.
Brian
Received on Wednesday, 26 June 2002 13:34:48 UTC