> Even if we prefer to write 123 and "123", why do we need *the datatype of a > typed literal in the RDF abstract syntax* when we can simply use rdf:type > set to xsd:Integer? why do we need rdf:Datatype or rdf:type for literals when we can simply not use them? JSON for serialization - the types are implicit in the encoding - and native language types when in memory - i added typed-literals to an app this morning and theres certainly no visible type tags anywhere - theyre somewhere deep in the parsing and implementation layers of the tools used.. > > GarretReceived on Thursday, 2 August 2007 17:18:36 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:22:50 GMT