From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Here is my revised version: 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. One of the dimensions by which one can categorize datatyping proposals is by whether individual values are explicitly or implicitly typed, e.g. whether each occurrence needs to specify xsd:integer (explicit) or whether xsd:integer is specified as the rdfs:range of the property (implicit). We believe that RDF should allow users to choose either approach, and have adopted this approach in DAML+OIL. The use of implicit typing allows for compatibility with existing RDF data and much XML data. The use of both implicit and explicit typing allows for an extra check on the appropriateness of input. The use of explicit typing allows for direct control of the typing of data. We encourage the RDF Core Working Group to also allow both explicit and implicit typing, and believe this approach to be compatible with several of the current datatyping proposals.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 04/02/02 EST