RE: Input on Datatypes

I'd like to register my vote in the following order:

Vote:
Prefer A to be yes( if only one of A or D has to be chosen )

Agree:
That's a dumb question and Prefer A & D to be yes.

Support: 
Requiring the syntax to be precise about the value that is intended;
Specifically I advocate anything untyped is a string.


Reasoning:

	Rdf idioms:

	<Jenny> <pp> "10"
	<pp> rdfs:range <humptyfratz>

	<John> <qq> _:a
	_:a <whadyamacallits> "10"


	Opinions:

	"10" equals "10"

		also

	10 equals 10

		also

	while interpretationOf("10") may or may not equal 10

	"10" does not equal 10

		and finally

	10 humptyfratz may or may not equal 10 whadyamacallits


Pat

-----Original Message-----
From: Brian McBride [mailto:bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2002 6:38 AM
To: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
Subject: Input on Datatypes: Summary of responses so far



First, thanks to everyone who has responded to the request for input.

   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-interest/2002Jul/0045.html


Secondly, a brief remark to those who are concerned about the question and 
the constraints based on the answers.  One of my failings is often to be 
less clear than I should be in setting the context for a message.

The context here is that the WG has been struggling to get a first 
datatypes WD published.  We are stuck in a loop.  This question is designed 
to get us out of that loop.  That done, we will publish our first WD and 
invite full public discussion of that draft.  It would be very helpful to 
us if folks could treat this question  in the form:

    given (for now) that we had to make the choice between YES to A
    or YES to D, which is better

Given a decisive answer to that question, we can get on and seek your 
review of the full datatypes proposal.

Now, a summary of responses so far.  Please let me know your response is 
missing or inaccurately represented.


Responses:

   Prefer A to be yes:  none

   Prefer D to be yes: 4

 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2002JulSep/0021.html
 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2002JulSep/0028.html
 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2002JulSep/0045.html
 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2002JulSep/0022.html

   Responses I'm unable to interpret one way or the other: 2
 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2002JulSep/0023.html
 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2002JulSep/0026.html

   That's a dumb question: 1
 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2002JulSep/0039.html
 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2002JulSep/0054.html
      http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-interest/2002Jul/0059.html
      http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-interest/2002Jul/0047.html

   Suggested Alternative Approaches:

      Consider defining literals to denote *sets* of values.
 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2002JulSep/0033.html

      Have two different kinds of equality
 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2002JulSep/0023.html

      Require the syntax to be precise about the value that is intended
      http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-logic/2002Jul/0069.html
 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2002JulSep/0024.html

Finally, the response period has slipped and I will be on holiday next week.

Brian

Received on Thursday, 18 July 2002 13:50:36 UTC