Re: draft RDF datatyping response

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider (pfps@research.bell-labs.com)
Date: 01/08/02

• Next message: Mike Dean: "Joint Committee telecon today 8 January"
• Previous message: Ian Horrocks: "Re: draft RDF datatyping response"
• In reply to: Mike Dean: "draft RDF datatyping response"
• Next in thread: Peter F. Patel-Schneider: "Re: draft RDF datatyping response"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
• Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

I would much prefer a very different response to go back to the RDF Core
Working Group.  One that starts something like:


Whatever datatyping facilities are selected by the RDF Core Working Group,
it is the opinion of the Joint Committee that the primary criterion for RDF
datatyping facilities should be compatibility with existing XML and XML
Schema datatyping facilities.


I also have the same concerns as Ian with respect to the use of validation
and consistency checking, as these terms have already caused considerable
discussion in the RDF community.

peter

• Next message: Mike Dean: "Joint Committee telecon today 8 January"
• Previous message: Ian Horrocks: "Re: draft RDF datatyping response"
• In reply to: Mike Dean: "draft RDF datatyping response"
• Next in thread: Peter F. Patel-Schneider: "Re: draft RDF datatyping response"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
• Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

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