- From: <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
- Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 00:31:43 +0100
- To: patrick.stickler@nokia.com
- Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
> Here's my very short list of outstanding issues that I see as > still remaining to be resolved for the stake-in-the-ground datatyping > proposal, with proposed resolutions: > > > 1. Union versus non-union interpretation of datatypes > > Overview of Issue: > > a) XML Schema associates a single URI with a datatype. That > URI denotes the entire datatype, not just its value space. > Stating that the URI only denotes the value space may be > considered contrary to the XML Schema usage and leaves > datatypes without a formally defined URI denoting the entire > datatype. Per ?d rdfs:domain ?d that single uri denotes the valuespace and the valuespace-to-lexicalspace mapping but *not* the lexicalspace. Maybe for S-B we could use ``?p rdfs:range [ xsi:type ?d ]'' to say that the range of ?p is the lexical space of the datatype ?d e.g. eg:Jenny eg:age "35" . eg:age rdfs:range _:1 . _:1 xsi:type xsd:number . [...] -- Jos
Received on Monday, 11 March 2002 23:47:58 UTC