W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > August 2002

RE: Alternative representation of typed literal nodes in NTriples (and N3)

From: <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2002 14:11:44 +0300
Message-ID: <A03E60B17132A84F9B4BB5EEDE57957B160BE2@trebe006.europe.nokia.com>
To: <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>
Cc: <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>



> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Jan Grant [mailto:Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk]
> Sent: 23 August, 2002 14:03
> To: Stickler Patrick (NRC/Tampere)
> Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg
> Subject: RE: Alternative representation of typed literal nodes in
> NTriples (and N3)
> 
> 
> On Fri, 23 Aug 2002 Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com wrote:
> 
> > > On Thu, 22 Aug 2002 Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com wrote:
> > >
> > > > It also reinforces, IMO, the fact that the typed literal
> > > node is a pairing
> > > > of a datatype and a literal, the latter having its own
> > > three-part structure
> > > > of XML bit, string, and language code.
> > >
> > > I'm not convinced that this is a "fact".
> >
> > Well, fair enough.
> >
> > One could also consider literals to be quads, made up
> > of datatype, lexical form, XML bit, and lang.
> >
> > I'm OK with either.
> 
> How are you disposed towards (datatype, stuff) where stuff may or may
> not be further structured?

If 'stuff' constitutes (or contains) in some explicit fashion a lexical
representation which is interpreted in terms of that datatype, sure.

Patrick
Received on Friday, 23 August 2002 07:11:48 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:50:27 EDT