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

Re: rdf:datatype v xsi:type

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2002 10:34:50 +0100
Message-ID: <3DAD32BA.2080401@hpl.hp.com>
To: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
CC: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org

Graham Klyne wrote:

> At the level of RDF concrete syntax, using namespace prefixes (as in 
> QNames) might be OK, but I think it would be problematic in an RDF graph 
> where the concept of scoping is, at best, very weak.  In this respect, 
> the decision to use (just) full URIs as identifiers seems rather sound.

Only superficially compelling.
The only syntax that matters here is RDF/XML - we could do the qname to URI 
mapping bwteen RDF/XML and the graph.

I don't think there are any killers here.
In particularly I disagree with Patrick when he raises non-XSD types - 
simply out of scope as far as I am concerned.

Received on Wednesday, 16 October 2002 05:35:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:24:16 UTC