RE: DRS guide -- usage scenario ?

You also may look at the schema context names of XQuery....

Michael

> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-rdf-rules-request@w3.org
[mailto:www-rdf-rules-request@w3.org]
> On Behalf Of Bijan Parsia
> Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2004 9:22 AM
> To: Drew McDermott
> Cc: www-rdf-rules@w3.org
> Subject: Re: DRS guide -- usage scenario ?
> 
> 
> On Jan 15, 2004, at 11:50 AM, Drew McDermott wrote:
> 
> >> [Bijan Parsia]
> >> I think that interesting structured literals can do a fair bit.
> >
> > I guess I don't know what "literal" means.  What does it mean?
(Just
> > point me to the right section of the right technical working group
> > recommendation working paper formal normative note.)
> 
> Sure.
> 
> 	http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-concepts/#section-Datatypes
> 	http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-mt/#dtype_interp
> 
> 	http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-semantics/syntax.html#2.1
> 	http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-semantics/direct.html#3.1
> 
> Interesting use of XMLLiterals, especially, if you want to use XML
> schema complex datatypes requires solving:
> 
> """Because there is no standard way to go from a URI reference to an
> XML Schema datatype in an XML Schema, there is no standard way to use
> user-defined XML Schema datatypes in OWL."""
> 
> But I believe Peter has a solution that he in fact proposed to the XML
> Schema working group. There's no fundamental technical issue about
> complex types, only the standardization of names. If RDF/XMLLiterals
> (or RDF/N3 literals) proved of special interest, we could coin uris
for
> them and ask the community of tool builders to take those into
account.
> 
> Cheers,
> Bijan Parsia.
>

Received on Thursday, 15 January 2004 14:28:52 UTC