W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > November 2002

Re: rdfs:Datatype question

From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2002 09:42:54 +0200
Message-ID: <004601c283d5$c8dd1540$399316ac@NOE.Nokia.com>
To: "Brian McBride" <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, "ext Graham Klyne" <Graham.Klyne@mimesweeper.com>
Cc: <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>, "ext pat hayes" <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>

[Patrick Stickler, Nokia/Finland, (+358 40) 801 9690, patrick.stickler@nokia.com]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "ext Graham Klyne" <Graham.Klyne@mimesweeper.com>
To: "Brian McBride" <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Cc: "Patrick Stickler" <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>; <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>; "ext pat hayes" <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Sent: 03 November, 2002 12:35
Subject: Re: rdfs:Datatype question

> I think you're all correct, in different ways.  I think that, as Pat says, 
> there's no fundamental need for rdfs:Datatype in the core language.  But 
> there are applications for which it might be a useful piece of additional 
> vocabulary.
> I think that trying to define *every* piece of possibly useful vocabulary 
> would be a slippery slope for this WG.  SO the question becomes:  what is 
> lost by NOT having rdfs:Datatype in the core RDF(S) specs?

A reasonable term to base interoperability on. How else will applications
be able to be told that a given URI denotes an RDF compatable datatype?

> My own thoughts at this time are that someone might want to draft a NOTE 
> about using datatypes as interpretation properties (which as far as I can 
> tell is neither sanctioned nor forbidden by our work so far), and I think 
> such a note would be a natural place to introduce a term with the intended 
> meaning of rdfs:Datatype.

I think it is very important to have it in the core specs, and not
that much work.


> #g
> --
> At 11:41 AM 11/2/02 +0000, Brian McBride wrote:
> >At 13:08 02/11/2002 +0200, Patrick Stickler wrote:
> >
> >>IMO, we need rdfs:Datatype to define the set of classes which
> >>have the required characteristics for RDF datatyping, namely
> >>a lexical space, a value space, and an N:1 mapping from the
> >>lexical value space where N > 0.
> >>
> >>The term rdfs:Datatype is a means to give a name to the set
> >>of RDF Classes which exhibit those characteristics.
> >
> >That is a good point, which I translate as: the model theory may say 
> >nothing about the meaning of rdfs:Datatype, but would it be useful to 
> >applications, e.g.  for example, knowing that something is a datatype 
> >could trigger an app to go to its datatype implementation registry and 
> >look for an implementation.  I'm not entirely convinced by that 
> >example.  Maybe Patrick has one.
> >
> >Intuitively, it would seem a bit strange to have a concept like the class 
> >of datatypes and not have a name for it.
> >
> >Brian
> -------------------
> Graham Klyne
> <GK@NineByNine.org>
Received on Monday, 4 November 2002 02:42:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:24:18 UTC