On Monday 18 January 2010 17:07:49 Harry Halpin wrote: > But how about: > > a b "blah blah z" > > as in ex:London ex:hasTemp "10 ex:Celsius" > > where z is a URI for a custom data-type that defines a relationship to > the base XML Schema data-types? > > RDF needs to take syntactic sugar seriously. So, we could imagine that > then we could decompose > > a b "blah blah z" -> a b "blah blah" AND "blah blah" rdf:value z" > > i.e. > > ex:London ex:hasTemp "10" AND "10 rdf:value ex:Celsius" That makes any occurance of 10 have value (surely: unit) Celsius, which strikes me as ... unhappy. What's wrong with [1] ex:London ex:hasTemp [rdf:value 10; units:inUnit ex:Celsius] where rdf:value might not be quite the right property, and units:inUnit is a new property for expressing units without yet any commitment to how those units are defined? [1] Expecting several answers ... -- RDF is not /the/ answer. RDF is /an/ answer. - Arcadian Epimorphics Ltd Registered address: C/O Robson Taylor, Froomsgate House, Bristol Registered number: 7016688Received on Tuesday, 19 January 2010 14:01:43 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 21:45:33 GMT