Re: More on XSD in RDF

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


----- Original Message -----
From: "ext Jan Grant" <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>
To: "Patrick Stickler" <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
Cc: "ext Dan Connolly" <connolly@w3.org>; "Brian McBride" <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>; "ext Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>;
"w3c-rdfcore-wg" <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Sent: 26 November, 2002 12:35
Subject: Re: More on XSD in RDF


> On Tue, 26 Nov 2002, Patrick Stickler wrote:
>
> > I think you are missing the critical point here. And that is that
> > the XML Schema specs say that *NEITHER* of the above are true.
>
> DanC claimed that they did, at the last telecon - remember "WHERE are
> the WORDS?!" :-)

Well, I would say that there are no words whatsoever defining
any subtype relation between xsd:float and xsd:decimal -- and
so the question then is "where are the words" that define such
a relation.

The reality is that neither can be a subtype of the other because
both have values in their value spaces which don't occur in the others.

Whether or not their value spaces intersect, is still an open question.
I think that anyone with half a clue would presume that they do in fact
intersect -- and that if the specs suggest they don't that they should
be fixed -- but the ambiguity is there.

> I agree with you that it's not a problem of RDF's making; but if there
> _is_ disagreement over the answer then we need to feedback to XML
> Schema.

I fully agree, and we should do that, and move on. And when moving
on, avoid the controversial areas of XML Schema datatypes by using
examples where there is clear derivation defined by the XML Schema
spec.

Patrick

Received on Tuesday, 26 November 2002 05:52:22 UTC