For me the question is how to name the precision information. Do not
the XSD facets "totalDigits" and "fractionDigits" work well enough? I
mean
.number:totalDigits contains a positive power of ten for
precision
.number:fractionDigits contains a negative power of ten for
precision
The use of the word "datatype" is always interesting as
somehow it's meant organically different from "the measurement" to which
it's related. Both are resources with named properties - what are those
names? Certain property names derived from (international standards)
should be considered "builtin" to whatever foundation the implementing
tool procides. I suggest that XSD names be used at least for concepts
that appear to be the same, with or without the xsd: xml-namespace
prefix.
But the word "datatype" fascinates me even more ever since SMW
internalized the Datatype namespace. Because to me RDF made an error
back when the rdf:type property got the range Class, when it should have
been Datatype (though politics got in the way!) It gets more twisted, as
now Category is the chosen implementation of rdfs:Class. The problem
that presents is that categories are lists and a class (that is,
rdf:type value) is, for some singular, and for others a plural, concept
or label. Pure semantic mayhem.
I'm happy SMW internalized the
datatype namespace to the extent it maps to its software chiefly because
it clarifies that a standard "Type" namespace is needed -- which
contains singular noun phrases -- which is the value range for rdf:type
(if you will) properties. All Measurement types (eg Feet, Height &
Lumens) would be represented there too, like any other "class", with its
associated properties that (in the case of numerics) would include
".totalDigits" and ".fractionDigits".
Going this route -- establishing
a standard Type namespace -- would allow wikis to have a separate
vocabulary of singular noun phrases not in the Category namespace. The
ultimate goal is to associate a given Type to its implemention as a wiki
namespace, subpage or subobject; the Category namespace itself is
already overloaded to handle that task.
-john
On 19.12.2012 14:50,
Gregor Hagedorn wrote:
> totally agree - hopefully XSD facets provide
a solid start to meeting those concrete requrements
they don't.
They allow to define derived datatypes and thus apply to
the datatype,
not the measurement. Different
measurements of the same
datatype may
be of different precision.
--gregor
_______________________________________________
Wikidata-l mailing
list
Wikidata-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l [1]
Links:
------
[1]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l