- From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 12:35:54 +0100
- To: Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org>, RDF core WG <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
At 11:57 25/10/2002 +0100, Graham Klyne wrote: [...] >2. Jeremy's proposal has been criticized as changing the XML schema >datatyping model. I believe it is being criticised for being different to the XML schema datatyping model. We have not power to change the xsd model. > I don't think such criticism is well-founded. I am not sure I'd use the word 'criticised'. An observation is being made about a feature of the proposal. XSD maps strings to values. The current proposal in the concepts doc permits the mapping of pairs (string, lang) to values: [[The value associated with the literal is found by applying the datatype mapping associated with the datatype URI to the lexical form. The lexical form is considered either as the pair (string and language identifier) or just as the string component, as appropriate for the datatype.]] http://www.ninebynine.org/wip/RDF-concepts/2002-10-25/rdf-concepts.html section 4.2.2 That looks different to me. Let me put it as a test case. Does <a> <b> "foo"@"lang1"^^dtype . entail <a> <b> "foo"@"lang2"^^dtype . for all dtype except the two built in ones for M&S style literals? Brian
Received on Friday, 25 October 2002 07:33:25 UTC