RE: [xdi] Bill's suggestions

["Drummond Reed" <drummond.reed@cordance.net>]

Laurie, thanks for the reminder. To extract Bill's question, it was:

> But..is $data meant to represent actual data, or the datatype? Put
> another way, what is the relationship of
> 	@example+foo$data
> to
> 	@example+foo//

First I need to clarify that that $data is used to define datatypes as an
XDI RDF object XRI value, not as an XDI RDF subject, so I think the
appropriate question is, what is the relationship of:

	+sometype+foo/$is$a/$data+string
to
	@example/+sometype+foo//

What the first XDI RDF statement says is that the datatype of +sometype+foo
is a string. From that you know that any XDI RDF statement that uses
+sometype+foo as a predicate and has a literal as an object will have a
string as datatype of the literal.

More in the next version of the proposal coming shortly (either tonight or
tomorrow morning).

=Drummond 

-----Original Message-----
From: laurie.rae@cordance.net [mailto:laurie.rae@cordance.net] 
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 9:11 PM
To: Drummond Reed
Cc: 'Barnhill, William'; xdi@lists.oasis-open.org; xri@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [xdi] Bill's suggestions

Drummond,

I apologize if you've already addressed this in the newest version of the
RDFX documentation, but I just wanted to follow up wrt Bill's question
about $data, given that I asked you a similar question last week. That is,
is $data meant to represent data or the data type?

And, if it is meant to represent data, how is the data type represented?

Cheers,

Laurie

> Bill,
>
> Thanks for the very helpful analysis of the RDF predicate mapping of the 5
> RDFX verbs. Paul Trevithick sent me a note with a similar analysis and I
> believe identical conclusions (we need time to study them closely).
>
> I also think that "as" is a brilliant suggestion as the English equivalent
> of the $data predicate. I kept wondering about that one and you nailed it
> on
> the head.
>
> See my next message about the recurring question of naming of the five
> predicates.
>
> =Drummond
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Barnhill, William [mailto:barnhill_william@bah.com]
> Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2007 2:11 PM
> To: xdi@lists.oasis-open.org; xri@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: [xri] RE: [xdi] Re: [xri] Agenda: Joint XRI & XDI TC Telecon 4pm
> PT
> Thursday 2007-02-08
>
>
> I won't be able to attend the telecon, but wanted to post some thoughts
> on the RDFX doc:
>
> It would make seeing the RDF fidelity easier if the five root RDFX
> predicates table contains a column that maps to the equivalent RDF
> predicate, specifically:
>
> Predicate		English	Relationship	RDF style Predicate
> $ref			"is"		equivalence
> owl:equivalentClass
> $ref$object		"is a"	inheritance		rdf:type (if
> subj is an object, owl:class otherwise)
> $link			"has"		aggregation
> exns:hasXXX, where XXX is the property name specified within the link
> XRI
> $link$object	"has a"	composition		exns:xxx, where xxx is
> the property type specified within the link XRI
> $data			""		datatype
> rdf:parseType
>
> I'd also suggest an English phrase for data: "as", ex: "as String"
> But..is $data meant to represent actual data, or the datatype? Put
> another way, what is the relationship of
> 	@example+foo$data
> to
> 	@example+foo//
>
>
> Exns is the prefix for a domain-specific namespace.
>
> On the 3 col graph, I like it, though I'd like to see it bigger to
> labelling is clearer.
>
> On tightening the XRI syntax within the schema there's a fairly easy way
> that makes it clear, and doesn't impose a further burden on
> implementers, but does allow them to do automated checking if they want:
> use schematron extensions within the schema.
>
> Bill
>
>