- From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
- Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 19:40:59 +0300
- To: "ext Jan Grant" <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>, Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
- Cc: "ext Brian McBride" <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, "w3c-rdfcore-wg" <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
_____________Original message ____________ Subject: Re: Some excerpts from AdobeXMP SDK Documentation Sender: ext Jan Grant <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk> Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 19:27:40 +0300 On Thu, 26 Sep 2002, Patrick Stickler wrote: > OK. The short answer is yes, but it is you, and not Jena > that is presuming string based semantics. The question that this raises, then, is whether it is you, and not the adobe API, that is presuming value-based semantics :-) It is IMO the Adobe API, though I will certainly not deny my biased position, I really did take care not to read my own preferences into the documentation and examples. Folks are free to evaluate the materials for themselves and draw their own conclusions (though note the recent comments from Adobe). Sorry for the flippancy, but you appear to be saying that evidence from examining an API is primarily based on the views of the examiner. I would say that both XMP and Jena will allow a developer to impose either string or value based semantics, but that XMP presumes and promotes in its API value based semantics. Jena is agnostic. The examples you've uncovered are interesting, though: do they support the notion that the adobe api has value, not string-based semantics for datatyped literals? I believe that the recent comments from Alan Lillich indicate both value based semantics and long range datatyping by means of property ranges. While not possible to fully escape some involvement with lexical representations, XMP apps care about values, not strings used to denote values. Patrick
Received on Thursday, 26 September 2002 12:42:01 UTC