W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > September 2007

re: XML Schema draft populates the intersection of Language and InformationResource [ISSUE-14 httpRange-14]

From: Chimezie Ogbuji <chimezie@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2007 16:27:16 -0400
Message-ID: <f6ec8dcb0709121327m43dcb036n3ebda862d5b655ab@mail.gmail.com>
To: www-tag@w3.org, "Dan Connolly" <connolly@w3.org>

Dan Connolly writes:

> $ HEAD http://www.w3.org/XML/XMLSchema
> 200 OK
> So the draft proposes that http://www.w3.org/XML/XMLSchema
> identifies both an information resource and a language.

> Is it just me, or does this seem like a map/territory bug, to others?

Not to me.  As I've been pointing out before, if assertions are
expressed in a formal knowledge representation which properly
distinguishes languages from "information resources" there is no
problem.  Consider DOLCE's corresponding term for 'linguistic object':

<owl:Class rdf:about="#linguistic-object">
    <rdfs:comment rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string"
    >An information object ordered by (encoded according to) a

There is a *clear* (ontological) seperation between the document
(information object/resource) and the language it is encoded in.  IMO,
The bug here is with the mechanism used to conclude the nature of
http://www.w3.org/XML/XMLSchema not, the draft.

> There are languages and there are documents that specify/describe
> languages, but those classes don't intersect, do they?

In DOLCE (see [1] & [2]) they *may* (I couldn't determine this from a
quick perusal) but at the very least, the semantics of what a document
is and a language encoding is clearly articulated.

[1] http://www.loa-cnr.it/ontologies/InformationObjects.owl
[2] http://www.loa-cnr.it/ontologies/ExtendedDnS.owl

-- Chimezie
Received on Wednesday, 12 September 2007 20:27:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:56:17 UTC