- 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