Document structure

At the telecon I mentioned that we had been conceiving of datatyping as a 
layer, whereas now we are conceiving of datatyping as "built-in".

To try and give some examples, in S-A, S-B, TDL, Stake-in-the-ground, the 
syntaxes (Graph, RDF/XML, N-triple) were unchanged. The basic MT was 
unchanged. So a datatyped RDF/XML document could be interpreted by a 
non-datatype aware RDF processor. (Such a processor wouldn't understand the 
datatypes, but it would not make mistakes. Datatyping basically adds 
additional entailments, and additional guide to the applications).

Now, however we have moved to a position in which the graph itself is changed 
and hence all other syntaxes and the MT MUST ab initio understand datatyping. 
There will not be any possibility of supporting RDF 2002 without datatyping.

Thus the normative content of the datatyping spec is necessarily normative 
content of the syntax, abstract data model, and model theory specs.

It is not clear to me that the non-normative content alone justifies another 
document.

Jeremy

Received on Monday, 2 September 2002 09:46:24 UTC