[Bug 1974] Our published names for datatypes etc. don't resolve

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=1974

--- Comment #12 from Henry S. Thompson <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk> 2012-02-21 13:39:01 UTC ---
Given that the architectural questions around fragment ids and namespace
documents are unsettled, my recommendation for the time being is to proceed as
follows:

1) In the schema document for schema documents which will reside at
2001/XMLSchema.xsd once 1.1 is approved, add back, near the top, a slightly
corrected version of the prose which is present in the 1.0 version (and which
appears in the spec. itself in appendix C.1):
-----------------------------
      The W3C XML Schema specification says that all the built-in datatypes
      defined there (both primitive and derived) can be uniquely addressed
      via a URI constructed as follows:
        1) the base URI is the URI of the XML Schema namespace
        2) the fragment identifier is the name of the datatype

      For example, to address the int datatype, the URI is:

        http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#int

      Additionally, each facet can be uniquely
      addressed via a URI constructed as follows:
        1) the base URI is the URI of the XML Schema namespace
        2) the fragment identifier is the name of the facet

      For example, to address the maxInclusive facet, the URI is:

        http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#maxInclusive

      Additionally, each facet usage in a built-in datatype definition
      can be uniquely addressed via a URI constructed as follows:
        1) the base URI is the URI of the XML Schema namespace
        2) the fragment identifier is the name of the datatype, followed
           by a period (".") followed by the name of the facet

      For example, to address the usage of the maxInclusive facet in
      the definition of int, the URI is:

        http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#int.maxInclusive
-----------------------------
2) Update the existing namespace document (2001/XMLSchema.html) to include
essentially the same text.

At some future date, it may be appropriate to include RDFa in one or both of
those documents, and/or to provide a separate rdf+xml or Turtle or N3 document,
which provide an RDF grounding for the 'names' of all datatypes, facets and
facet usages, i.e. along the lines of

   <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#int> rdf:type rdfs:Datatype .

but it is not in my view necessary, or even appropriate, to do this yet.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.

Received on Tuesday, 21 February 2012 13:39:08 UTC