- From: Janne Saarela <janne.saarela@profium.com>
- Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 08:33:59 +0300
- To: www-rdf-comments@w3.org
- CC: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Hello > I have a couple of questions for you: > > 1) What does your software do with literals for which there is no > datatype information, i.e. given: > > <rdf:Description rdf:about="A"> > <foo:prop1>10</foo:age> > </rdf:Description> > <rdf:Description rdf:about="B"> > <foo:prop2>10</foo:age> > </rdf:Description> > > In the absence of any range information about the two properties does > your implementation regard the 'values' of the two properties as being > equal? It can be difficult to tell. In some implementations you can > and in some you cannot. And in RDFCore we can argue for a long time > whether you can tell or not :( If the RDF schema is missing the range property for a given property, Profium SIR assumes it to be of type &xsd;String. One can then run a query with SIR and look for equality or not-equality or pattern-matched parts of those values. This approach effectively makes those two property values equal should the range be missing from the schema. > 2) How big a burden to you would it be, if to be conformant, you had to > add a datatype attribute to the instance data, e.g. you had to write: > > <rdf:Description rdf:about="Jenny"> > <foo:age rdf:datatype="&xsd;integer">10</foo:age> > <rdf:Description> This would require us to rewrite our software completely. In addition, all RDF instance data should be rewritten. Janne -- Janne Saarela <janne.saarela@profium.com> Profium, Lars Sonckin kaari 12, 02600 Espoo, Finland Tel. +358 (0)9 855 98 000 Fax. +358 (0)9 855 98 002 Mob. +358 (0)40 508 4767 Internet: http://www.profium.com
Received on Friday, 11 October 2002 01:40:25 UTC