From: Joseph Coffman (jcoffman@bbn.com)
Date: 11/26/01
>From: owner-joint-committee@mail.daml.org >X-Recipient: <jcoffman@rospo1.bbn.com> >Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 10:48:47 -0500 (EST) >X-Authentication-Warning: mail.daml.org: majordom set sender to >owner-joint-committee@mail.daml.org using -f >To: mdean@bbn.com, bamundson@bbn.com, jcoffman@rospo1.bbn.com >Subject: BOUNCE joint-committee@mail.daml.org: Non-member submission >from [Roland Schwaenzl <Roland.Schwaenzl@mathematik.Uni-Osnabrueck.DE>] > > >From majordomo-owner Thu Nov 22 10:48:45 2001 >Received: from omecihuatl.rz.uni-osnabrueck.de >(omecihuatl.rz.Uni-Osnabrueck.DE [131.173.17.35]) > by mail.daml.org (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id fAMFmjK07881 > for <joint-committee@daml.org>; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 10:48:45 -0500 (EST) >Received: from scarlett.mathematik.Uni-Osnabrueck.DE >(scarlett.mathematik.Uni-Osnabrueck.DE [131.173.15.40]) > by omecihuatl.rz.uni-osnabrueck.de (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id > fAMFjMf11578; > Thu, 22 Nov 2001 16:45:22 +0100 >Received: (from roland@localhost) > by scarlett.mathematik.Uni-Osnabrueck.DE (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA03434; > Thu, 22 Nov 2001 16:45:21 +0100 (MET) >Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 16:45:21 +0100 (MET) >From: Roland Schwaenzl <Roland.Schwaenzl@mathematik.Uni-Osnabrueck.DE> >Message-Id: <200111221545.QAA03434@scarlett.mathematik.Uni-Osnabrueck.DE> >To: Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com, pfps@research.bell-labs.com >Subject: RE: Cutting the Patrician datatype knot >Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org, joint-committee@daml.org >X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII > > > > > > No. I'm proposing that the end result be much more like > > > > s --p--> xsd:du:x > >puuh! Hiding semantics in ascii-art. > > > > > > > Though, why use xsi:type rather than rdf:type? Are we saying > > > that a typed literal resource is a different kind of resource > > > than a typed non-literal resource, and hence the typing is > > > declared differently? Are we sure we want to say that? And > > > are we adopting the full semantics attributed by the XML Schema > > > spec to xsi:type? What are the implications for broader statements > > > about XML Schema constructs in general in RDF if we use it for > > > typing literal resources? > > > > Because the xsi:type plays a much different role than rdf:type. > >?? The lexical->data thing in itself proposes to go along DAML. > Clean and easy to understand. > > > > Yes, > > yes. Yes. Maybe, although all you need for this to go through is to > > understand the primitive (and, maybe, the built-in) XML Schema datatypes. > > > > I'm not aware of any problems with the rest of XML Schema. You should > > still be able to use xsd:integer as a class, for example. > > >[...] > > > > Is RDF, and, certainly > > RDF/XML, not part of the World-Wide Web. Is the RDF Core WG not chartered > > to ``build upon XML Schema datatypes to the fullest extent practical and > > appropriate''? > >data-typing is to aid processing data and not for changing data - >RDF is to decribe not to change something. > >Or? > >rs Joseph Coffman 703 284 8624 703 486 4567 BBN Technologies A Verizon Company
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 04/02/02 EST