W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > July 2007

literals in lists.

From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 23:53:17 -0400
To: Garret Wilson <garret@globalmentor.com>
Cc: Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>
Message-ID: <16449.1185335597@ubuhebe>


Garret Wilson <garret@globalmentor.com> writes:
> one v:familyName, and an rdf:List of v:additionalNames. (Constraints on 
> the number of v:honorificPrefix and v:honorificSuffix will be dropped.) 
> And therein lies the rub that I consistently forget: because additional 
> names will be literals, the rdf:List of v:additionalNames will have to 
> contain bnodes, each with an rdf:value containing the actual additional 
> name. (The same goes for v:extendedAddress.) Damn RDF! When can RDF just 
> go ahead and say that an rdf:List can hold literals? This irritates me 
> to no end.

Me, too.  :-(

To be clear, an rdf:List can have literals, it's just that
parseType=Collection cannot be used with such lists.

I'm curious why you prefer rdf:value for this workaround instead of
owl:sameAs....      

    -- Sandro
Received on Wednesday, 25 July 2007 03:54:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 07:41:58 UTC