- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: 22 Nov 2002 14:20:11 -0600
- To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
On Fri, 2002-11-22 at 13:06, Brian McBride wrote: > At 11:52 22/11/2002 -0600, Dan Connolly wrote: > > >Please include this in the test stuite. > > Lets not. > > Why are we creating such dependencies between RDF and xml schema. Umm... because we're chartered to? "RDF Schema must use and build upon XML Schema datatypes to the fullest extent that is practical and appropriate." -- http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCoreWGCharter > The RDF > test cases should test rdf. Lets keep to any dependencies of subtle > aspects of xml schema datatypes out of it. On the contrary! Let's be absolutely clear about which parts of the schema spec we depend on and which we don't. This isn't a question about how XML Schema works; it's about how our datatypes design integrates with XML Schema. If Jeremy and I have not convinced the WG that this is how XML Schema works, questions from those who doubt it should "be referred to the authorities who defined the datatypes", i.e. www-xml-schema-comments. If the WG doesn't agree that this is how our datatypes design works with XML Schema, somebody will please explain to me how it does work, preferably with an explanation that includes a few test cases. > This point seems to be subtle > enough to have misled DanC. That argues that it deserves a test case, no? > And lets not give ourselves any more work than > we have to. We are a little short of time after all. If we don't have time to do this design work, let's please re-open the datatypes decision and re-consider rdfs:format http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Oct/0031.html This rdfs:datatype design is complex; it deserves lots of test cases. I'm not interested in doing it half way. > Dan, if you want this to go into an rdf test suite, I'd like to see a > compelling reason why its necessary for RDF. First, to be clear, by RDF, I presume you mean to include RDFS and datatypes; I don't claim this test is necessary for RDF per se. Then, as I say: I think this rdfs:datatype design is complex; I can't support a request to take this design to Proposed Recommendation until I have seen enough implementation experience (i.e. test cases) to validate the design. Perhaps that's not compelling. And if push came to shove, I'd accept that a the base64binary/hexBinary test case I gave in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Nov/0567.html actually tests the same thing that this test case does. But when it comes to test cases, the more the merrier, no? > The XML schema guys can do > their own. I am an XML Schema guy; please let's not make this an us-versus-them thing. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Friday, 22 November 2002 15:20:16 UTC