Re: rdf:datatype v xsi:type

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.

Jeremy

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