- From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
- Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 10:25:07 -0400
- To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
On 2002-05-16 5:32, "ext Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com> wrote:
>
>
> Summary:
> ...
> - the model theory should be overhauled along the
> lines of Pat's simpledatatype2
I strongly support this proposal.
There is one additional advantage to simpledatatype2 that was
not pointed out in Jeremy's summary of the problem; and that
is that the present stake-in-the-ground proposal is nearly disjunct
from RDFS semantics, and also has a number of oddities because
of that, whereas the simpledatatype2 proposal fits within
RDFS semantics, introduces less vocabulary, and allows
datatyping to work pretty much the same as all other kinds
of RDFS typing and range assertions, and thus is more compatable
with RDFS in that regard.
So, no rdfd:datatype. Just rdfs:range, and folks already know
what that means and know how to use it.
Cheers,
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 Thursday, 16 May 2002 10:21:35 UTC