W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > July 2001

RE: #rdfms-literals-as-resources in scope?

From: Bill de hÓra <bdehora@interx.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 14:37:28 +0100
To: "rdf core" <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <69B15B675E99D411A4110008C786DA2301368F00@exwest_01.interx.com>


: Aaron Swartz:
:
:I'm not sure what that means. What is a "distinguished
:representation"? I think the question here is just what it would
:appear to be: Do literals (as defined by M&S) have URIs? Based
:on what I know about URIs, I'm pretty sure the answer is yes.
:
:Let me be rather clear about my position in general: I think
:that an RDF statement is made up of three URIs.

Can you point into the parts of the M&S which reinforce
your thinking?


:I don't see how this is relevant to the issue at hand. Yes,
:there is a set of things in M&S called "Literals". Whether this
:is a side-effect of the XML syntax, or of the abstract syntax is
:not clear to me. Still, even if it was a special part of the
:abstract syntax, that does not prevent the set of Literals from
:having URIs. And if we do decide that they have URIs, that does
:not prevent us from maintaining this distinction or "special
:treatment".

We should consider having a futures document, detailing issues
identified as relevant but out of scope for this iteration.

Personally I'm not sure that the RDF Literals should even
exist, or that it's possible to do anything generally useful
with them machine to machine.

However I have to say that this matter out of scope wrt
the charter.

regards,
Bill

----
Bill de hÓra  :  InterX  :  bdehora@interx.com
Received on Thursday, 5 July 2001 09:38:17 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:38:06 EDT