W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org > March 2007

Re: [RDFa] rdf:XMLLiteral (was RE: Missing issue on the list: identification of RDFa content)

From: Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@x-port.net>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 05:41:09 -0700
Message-ID: <640dd5060703190541n38357f53o8039f0be426b76f2@mail.gmail.com>
To: public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org

Hi Dan,

> I think the point is that most RDF applications and vocabularies, when
> they have stringy data, use and expect plain literals. And if people
> write RDFa with an eye to existing RDF apps rather than ones engineered
> specifically for the post-RDFa world, they'll do the extra typing to
> make sure they're also generating plain literals.

Can you give an example of how this might manifest itself? I've
already shown in a separate thread that running SPARQL queries without
paying attention to the RDF Concepts notion of equality will cause
problems, regardless of whether you use RDFa or not. And since we've
also seen that the RDFS for FOAF (for example) already allows for
values that can be either plain literals or typed literals, we know
that SPARQL queries on FOAF data could suffer from the same problem.

So do you have anything that is specific to RDFa? Also, if there is
anything, can you comment on whether the problem you foresee would be
addressed by modifying the parsing model so that either a typed
literal or a plain literal is created, depending on whether the
element being parsed has element children or not?

Regards,

Mark


-- 
  Mark Birbeck, formsPlayer

  mark.birbeck@x-port.net | +44 (0) 20 7689 9232
  http://www.formsPlayer.com | http://internet-apps.blogspot.com

  standards. innovation.
Received on Monday, 19 March 2007 12:41:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:15:04 GMT