[topicmapmail] PSIs?

[Lars Marius Garshol]

* Murray Altheim
| 
| RDF has created a set of URIs that correspond roughly to a subset of
| XSD's datatypes, then added a few of their own and deprecated use of
| some of the XSD ones. And those URIs are OWL's creation -- they
| don't point into the XSD spec, just use its namespace (base URI).

Sure, we agree on that.

| IOW, RDF did exactly what I'm proposing, i.e., creating a new set of
| URIs, except they don't point anywhere.  Mine at least point
| *actually* to the place in the XSD where a human can get a
| definition. I chose deliberately *not* to use the OWL ones because
| they're broken in this sense.

I didn't notice that they did not resolve, so that means that if you'd
followed what I said you wouldn't have conformed to the OASIS rules.
I was wrong, sorry about that.

| I could use the OWL ones, but I'd gain nothing. 

You would: only a single set of URIs. On the other hand, you'd lose
conformance to the OASIS recommendations and the nice property that
the URIs would resolve to the documentation. It's a trade-off.

| I'd rather point at XSD directly than point at XSD via OWL via
| RDF. That's silly. If someone thinks we need subject identity with
| the OWL set, we can add subject identifiers within the PSI topic
| map, either within or via a separate topic map.

In that case I'm afraid I have to confess to being a silly OWL/RDF
poodle, because I would prefer to use the same URIs as the W3C. If you
prefer to be some non-silly kind of TM human being that's your choice.

I've really made my point: I think having a single set of URIs is the
most important thing (for reasons given in previous emails). If you
think other things are more important there's not really a whole lot
more to say.

-- 
Lars Marius Garshol, Ontopian         <URL: http://www.ontopia.net >
GSM: +47 98 21 55 50                  <URL: http://www.garshol.priv.no >