[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

FW: First Draft of RDF, differences from my notes.

  • From: Andrew Layman <andrewl@m...>
  • To: "xml-dev Mailing List (E-mail)" <xml-dev@i...>
  • Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 15:53:41 -0700

rdf and xml differences
After reading the RDF paper, I posted the following message to the RDF
working group.  Since the RDF paper is now posted to the XML dev mailing
list, these comments are relevant in the new context.

--Andrew Layman
   AndrewL@m...

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Andrew Layman 
> Sent:	Friday, August 01, 1997 4:24 PM
> To:	w3c-labels-wg@w...; w3c-dsig-collect@w...
> Subject:	First Draft of RDF, differences from my notes.
> 
> Thank you for the early draft of the paper. In reading it over, I've
> found a number of points that differ from my recollection of our
> Boston meeting. Perhaps my notes and memory are wrong on some of these
> points (in which case I welcome correction) but it also appears that
> some new features have crept into the document:
> 
> 2.	We only agreed on ablocks describing single resources. I
> remember discussing having an RDF assertion block describe
> characteristics of more than one resource, but concluding that this is
> a difficult problem with great risk of user confusion. (I'm not
> opposed to solving this problem; just want to note that we did not
> solve it but left it for the future.)
> 
> 2.4	I don't remember us ever finding a satisfactory way for the
> ablock to actually contain its target resource (because the
> subelements of an ablock are interpreted as properties of the ablock's
> target).
> 
> 2.	We discussed the need for a small set of base data types, which
> I believe were strings, numbers and dates/times.  We also talked at
> length about the need to distinguish between a base semantic type such
> as date and a particular format such as ISO8061. The sentance
> beginning "The domain of property values..." does not reflect dates or
> the semantic/format distinction.
> 
> 3.	I don't remember agreement on refTypeAttr.  Did we but I don't
> have it in my notes?
> 
> 3.	We most definitely did not agree that the first namespace
> element sets a default namespace!  We did agree, tentatively, that we
> might make the "as" attribute optional, where its omission could
> signal that it was to be the default namespace for its containing
> element (with the caveat that this needs more thought).  We also
> discussed that a namespace attribute on the containing element might
> be a better way to achieve the same effect.
> 
> 3.	I remember discussing listItem, but don't remember ever nailing
> it down precisely or agreeing on it.
> 
> Example 5.1.1.	This simply needs to be clarified. I think what
> is meant is that an ablock with no href has as its implied target the
> entirety of the enclosing document.
> 
> 5.2.3	The note at the bottom makes the assertion that a downlevel
> application can blindly concatenate together elements it does not
> understand. My recollection is that we discussed this, concluded that
> such a policy is dangerous and presumes to dictate processing. We did
> agree to investigate adding some standard attribute that might signal
> when such a policy is reasonable. We identified three values for such
> an attribute: (a) ignore the unknown element, (b) ignore the unknown
> tag, (c) application cannot process this element or any peer.
> 
> I don't mean these comments to be interpreted as disagreements with
> any aspect of the RDF design, but rather as a report on differences
> between my notes and the current paper.
> 
> --Andrew Layman
>    AndrewL@m...
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Ralph R. Swick [SMTP:swick@w...]
> Sent:	Friday, August 01, 1997 9:49 AM
> To:	w3c-labels-wg@w...; w3c-dsig-collect@w...
> Subject:	First draft of RDF specification for review
> 
> The first draft of the Resource Description Framework Model and Syntax
> specification (Lassila & Swick, eds.) is now ready for your review and
> comment.
> 
>   http://www.w3.org/Member/9708/WD-rdf-syntax-970801.html
> 
> I would like to ask this working group's permission to distribute
> this draft to w3c-xml-sig.  xml-sig is the forum where technical
> discussions of XML are ocurring and they particularly need to see
> our requirements for the namespace tag.  The only reason I ask your
> consent is that while xml-sig is a W3C Members forum, it has quite
> a few non-Member invited experts.  I will distribute this draft to
> that list at 1600UTC on Monday, August 5 unless I hear serious
> objections before then.
> 
> Thanks to all who have contributed thus far, and to each of you who
> will take the time to review and make suggestions for improvement.
> 
> -Ralph and Ora

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To unsubscribe, send to majordomo@i... the following message;
unsubscribe xml-dev
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (rzepa@i...)


PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!

Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!

Buy Stylus Studio Now

Download The World's Best XML IDE!

Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!

Don't miss another message! Subscribe to this list today.
Email
First Name
Last Name
Company
Subscribe in XML format
RSS 2.0
Atom 0.3
 

Stylus Studio has published XML-DEV in RSS and ATOM formats, enabling users to easily subcribe to the list from their preferred news reader application.


Stylus Studio Sponsored Links are added links designed to provide related and additional information to the visitors of this website. they were not included by the author in the initial post. To view the content without the Sponsor Links please click here.

Site Map | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks
Free Stylus Studio XML Training:
W3C Member
Stylus Studio® and DataDirect XQuery ™are products from DataDirect Technologies, is a registered trademark of Progress Software Corporation, in the U.S. and other countries. © 2004-2013 All Rights Reserved.