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

Re: after-hours conversation (#literal-as-resources #literal-is-xml-structure #xmllang #graph #identity-anon-resources #literal-subjects)

From: Jan Grant <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2001 15:30:13 +0100 (BST)
To: Art Barstow <barstow@w3.org>
cc: Ron Daniel <rdaniel@interwoven.com>, w3c-rdfcore-wg <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.31.0110161524560.2865-100000@mail.ilrt.bris.ac.uk>
On Tue, 16 Oct 2001, Art Barstow wrote:

>
> Ron - thanks for providing these notes.
>
> I like the general approach that is outlined and would favor
> representing a Literal as a bNode.

I hate to say it, but I'd take the opposite view: this seems clunky and
ugly.

> > 1) With respect to literals, let's define a solution based on where
> >    we want to be with RDF 2, then treat RDF 1 M&S as a special case,
> >    or simple mapping, down from that.

I'd say this is admirable, however. Whatever we do, we should not shut
the door to doing it right in RDF 2.

> > 2) In RDF 2, let each occurrence of a literal be a prince/b/whatever_node,
> >    identified in whatever way we decide to handle the things we used to
> >    call anonymous resources.

A primary goal seems to be doing some kind of datatyping on Literals.
We're all agreed on this (I'd hazard to say) but opinions differ when it
comes to the details. Certainly, if we do it right then a lot of
problems (xml:lang, parseType="Literal") have solutions which arise
naturally from the notion of typed literals.

I much prefer the explicit typing notion (or the "literal instance"
stuff that's also cropped up recently*) to this construct, which seems
to be mired in printnameism.

jan

* or a combination of the two, since they don't appear to be
incompatible.

-- 
jan grant, ILRT, University of Bristol. http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/
Tel +44(0)117 9287088 Fax +44 (0)117 9287112 RFC822 jan.grant@bris.ac.uk
Whose kung-fu is the best?
Received on Tuesday, 16 October 2001 10:37:39 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:41:04 EDT