Datatyping, rdf:type inappropriate

Currently rdf:type is used to add triples to a graph. The existence of
the triple in the graph

	A <rdf:type> C .

is used to indicate that A is a member of class C.

The proposed datatyping document's use of rdf:type does something
different; it is a syntactic mechanism for encoding a locally-typed
literal in the extended RDF/XML syntax.

Dave Beckett pointed out some practical problems with this.

In the telecon, Patrick S. said, "it doesn't matter if you used
foo:blarg for this attribute - a parser would still have to handle it
[therefore, why not just have a parser handle rdf:type]".

The issue I'm concerned about is not that a parser writer has to deal
with this. It's that a user of RDF/XML has to deal with this. You've
taken an attribute that maps onto the label on an arc in a graph and
turned it into a syntactic mechanism. *That*'s what I mean by

If it wasn't for the fact that "parseType" has already been overloaded
by the DAML collection stuff, _that_ might have been a better choice. As
it is, I think a new, purely syntactic attribute is by far the
preferable choice.

jan grant, ILRT, University of Bristol.
Tel +44(0)117 9287088 Fax +44 (0)117 9287112
The Java disclaimer: values of 'anywhere' may vary between regions.

Received on Sunday, 1 September 2002 05:41:34 UTC