Re: XML schema and RDF datatypes [was: comments...]

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider (
Date: 10/02/01

> [Dan Connolly]
> >It's also possible to design a language where the type of
> >a literal may *depend* on a declaration from an XML schema:
> >
> >	<kr:KRLang xmlns:rdf=""
> >		xmlns:ex="http://example/vocab">
> >	<ex:Person>
> >	  <ex:name>John Doe</ex:name>
> >	  <ex:shoeSize>10</ex:shoeSize>
> >	</ex:Person>
> >
> >so that the "10" above is not a logical constant at all;
> >not until you find a/the schema for http://example/vocab
> >do you know how to parse/interpret "10"... i.e. the
> >meaning of that chunk of XML is dependent on all the
> >trust issues around following links from one document
> >to another (not to mention a complete implementation
> >of XML Schema, an effort several orders of magnitude
> >larger than an RDF 1.0 parser).
> >
> >This sort of language is not a candidate for a future
> >version of RDF: it fails to meet
> >one of the basic requirements of RDF: that an RDF document
> >stands on its own as a logical formula.

I fail to see how this follows.

I would also appreciate a pointer that provides some measure of support for
the premise of this inference.  (In fact, I would find it very instructive
to see a concise, authoritative enumeration of the ``basic requirements of


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 04/02/02 EST