- From: Sean B. Palmer <sean@mysterylights.com>
- Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 18:06:34 +0100
- To: <jborden@mediaone.net>, <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>, <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
- Cc: <Ora.Lassila@nokia.com>
> If I e.g. want to use XML Schema to provide strict > data typing for my serialized RDF instances (e.g. strict > date formats, enumerations of token value sets such as > ISO language names, etc.) I need to be sure that both XML > Schema and RDF Schema are using the same URIs to talk about > the same things. Agreed, and this is a problem for most specifications of this nature, but not XML Schema in particular, because we can be very sure what URI to use for any particular concept. As long as we are careful to ensure that we only use the URI References in RDF applications, and the namespace sans "#" for XSD processors, then we have no need to worry. As for other specifications, Jon's schema algebra is a good thing to look at. DAML is a bit mixed up, seeing as how it uses the XSD namespace sans hash to create RDF datatypes. The way we did it with EARL (after some prodding from Dan and Aaron!) was to define our new datatypes as explicit URIs that are a DAML union of the URIs set out in the XSD specification. As EARL is an RDF application, there is no problem in doing that. Had it been an XSD application, we would have done it in the usual XSD in XML manner. -- Kindest Regards, Sean B. Palmer @prefix : <http://webns.net/roughterms/> . :Sean :hasHomepage <http://purl.org/net/sbp/> .
Received on Wednesday, 6 June 2001 13:06:13 UTC