- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 07:25:23 -0400 (EDT)
- To: Libby Miller <Libby.Miller@bristol.ac.uk>
- cc: Jan Grant <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>, Aaron Swartz <me@aaronsw.com>, Alan Davies <aland@steltor.com>, Michael Arick <marick@cse.ucsc.edu>, RDF Calendar <www-rdf-calendar@w3.org>, <brian_mcbride@hp.com>
(+cc: Brian McBride, RDF Core WG co-chair) On Tue, 26 Jun 2001, Libby Miller wrote: > > > route we chose to add this feature. This does seem like a > > > somewhat tricky issue you're facing. The best way I can think > > > of is something like: > > > > > > <dtstart><DateTime rdf:value="W3CDTF goes here" /></dtstart> > > > > > > What do you think? > > > > this would be a good option - but I prefer Jan's _if_ this work is > likely to happen reasonably soon! In the RDF Core WG we are about to start opening up issues relating to the RDF Schema Specification. Input from real-world applications of RDF, such as rdf-calendar, is of great value: it helps us prioritise our work, so we can focus on removing obstacles to RDF deployment. It also provides us with test cases material, so we can have some metrics for judging success. > > what d'you reckon Jan? Is there anything I/we can do to speed this > up? (these issues keep cropping up) I've got project time I could use > to look at this issue. The most detailed work on this to date has been in DARPA's DAML initiative. See http://www.daml.org/2001/03/daml+oil-index.html for recent specs which include a proposal for doing datatyping in RDF, or http://www.w3.org/RDF/Interest/ -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-logic/ for the RDF-Logic mailing list where many of the DAML folk hang out. The reference description of March's DAML+OIL spec has this to say on datatyping of literals using XML schema datatypes: http://www.daml.org/2001/03/reference.html#Values [[ Datatype values are written in a manner that is valid RDF syntax, but which is given a special semantics in DAML+OIL. The preferred method is to give a lexical representation of the value as a string, along with an XML Schema datatype that is used to provide the type of the value as well as the parsing mechanism to go from the string to the value itself. The XML Schema datatype is the rdf:type of the value, and the lexical representation is the rdf:value of the value. So the decimal 10.5 could be input as <xsd:decimal rdf:value="10.5"> provided that xsd was defined as the URI of the XML Schema Datatype specification. As a nod to backward compatability, literals that occur outside this sort of construction are interpreted as any of the XML Schema Datatype values with this lexical representation. These values are mostly unusable unless some typing information is available, such as a range for a property. The question of whether any XML Schema datatype can be used in such constructions, or whether only certain XML Schema dataypes can be so used (such as only the predefined datatypes), remains open. ]] > Are there any RDF processing issues you know of about this change? > > what does everyone think? I suggest trying to implement according to the DAML+OIL proposal, and letting the RDF Core WG know if it works, or doesn't work, for calendar applications. This will provide useful fodder for RDF Core discussions when we get to this topic. Dan > > Libby
Received on Tuesday, 26 June 2001 07:25:51 UTC