[oslc-core] Should we transition new specs to use dateTimeStamp instead of dateTime

[Steve K Speicher]

This might be handy, the RDF WG published "Review of XSD Datatypes 1.1 
Changes from an RDF perspective" [1]

It says:
"6. We should include the following types, new in XSD 1.1, to the list of
RDF-compatible XSD types:
   - xsd:dateTimeStamp, derived from xsd:dateTime by requiring a timezone
offset."

Though I am in agreement with Arthur on the SPARQL QUERY implications.  It 
does sound like we are a bit ahead of the curve in adopting XSD 1.1 
datatypes, I'd recommend we publish best practices as Arthur mentions 
until W3C RDF and SPARQL WGs publish their guidance.

[1] - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2012Feb/0039.html

Thanks,
Steve Speicher
IBM Rational Software
OSLC - Lifecycle integration inspired by the web -> 
http://open-services.net

oslc-core-bounces at open-services.net wrote on 09/24/2012 03:33:59 PM:

> From: Arthur Ryman <ryman at ca.ibm.com>
> To: John Arwe/Poughkeepsie/IBM at IBMUS, 
> Cc: oslc-core at open-services.net, oslc-core-bounces at open-services.net
> Date: 09/24/2012 03:36 PM
> Subject: Re: [oslc-core] Should we transition new specs to use 
dateTimeStamp
> instead of dateTime
> Sent by: oslc-core-bounces at open-services.net
> 
> John,
> 
> The breakage can occur in SPARQL since literal datatypes include a type 
> URI, e.g. "2012-09-24T15:07:42-05:00"^^xsd:dateTime is not the same 
> literal as "2012-09-24T15:07:42-05:00"^^xsd:dateTimeStamp. Therefore a 
> query that compared date values to literal values might fail if the RDF 
> representation changed to use xsd:dateTimeStamp.
> 
> The SPARQL spec has built-in support for xsd:dateTime in terms of 
syntax, 
> comparisons, and type casts. It does not mention xsd:dateTimeStamp 
> anywhere. I don't know if SPARQL would handle xsd:dateTimeStamp 
> reasonably.
> 
> Regards, 
> 
___________________________________________________________________________ 

> 
> Arthur Ryman 
> 
> DE, Chief Architect, Reporting &
> Portfolio Strategy and Management
> IBM Software, Rational 
> 
> Toronto Lab | +1-905-413-3077 (office) | +1-416-939-5063 (mobile) 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From:
> John Arwe <johnarwe at us.ibm.com>
> To:
> oslc-core at open-services.net
> Date:
> 09/24/2012 12:37 PM
> Subject:
> Re: [oslc-core] Should we transition new specs to use dateTimeStamp 
> instead of dateTime
> Sent by:
> oslc-core-bounces at open-services.net
> 
> 
> 
> >> In short: why *not* [use the new datatype for NEW vocabulary]? 
> 
> > If we change the datatype it could result in breakage, e.g. in SPARQL 
> > queries. 
> 
> Maybe I'm dense, but not seeing how using it for NEW terms can change 
> (hence: possibly break) anything. 
> If it's new, there is nothing existing to break.  Oder? 
> Best Regards, John
> 
> Voice US 845-435-9470  BluePages 
> Tivoli OSLC Lead - Show me the Scenario 
> _______________________________________________
> Oslc-Core mailing list
> Oslc-Core at open-services.net
> http://open-services.net/mailman/listinfo/oslc-core_open-services.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Oslc-Core mailing list
> Oslc-Core at open-services.net
> http://open-services.net/mailman/listinfo/oslc-core_open-services.net
>