Re: RDFCore WG: Datatyping documents

On 2002-02-05 17:22, "ext Manos Batsis" <> wrote:

>> From: Patrick Stickler []
>>> Finally, there is the subject of Type Libraries [2], that
>> are far more
>>> interesting.
>>> [2]
>> I don't see how this relates to RDF datatyping. Yes, it
>> may be more interesting than RDF datatyping but ... ;-)
> Since RDF is about metadata, it may prove very useful to be able to
> express that a certain resource (which may be a fragment) is of a
> certain type according to a schema language. The schema information may
> not be useful to the RDF but if this gets implemented, it may be the
> only way (someone please do correct me if I'm wrong) to associate XML
> fragments as resources with their structural validation module.

Ahhh, OK I think I understand now what you want to do.

If someone has an XML stream as a literal, you would like to
type it with a complex datatype in a similar fashion to
how we are typing lexical forms with simple datatypes.

My gut reaction is, sure, why not. The semantics of
complex datatypes and the relation between XML fragments
and complex datatypes is not exactly the same as that
between lexical forms and simple datatypes -- but off
hand, I don't see any significant problems with this.

Though it probably does need a bit of chewing on to make
sure it's fully digestible...

Maybe for desert, after the (very large) main course
of simple datatyping ;-)



Patrick Stickler              Phone: +358 50 483 9453
Senior Research Scientist     Fax:   +358 7180 35409
Nokia Research Center         Email:

Received on Tuesday, 5 February 2002 10:41:04 UTC