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

Re: a few questions about literals

From: Jan Grant <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 10:03:39 +0000 (GMT)
To: Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
cc: "Dan Connolly <connolly" <connolly@w3.org>, "Pat Hayes <phayes" <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>, w3c-rdfcore-wg <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.44.0203011001160.13403-100000@mail.ilrt.bris.ac.uk>
On Thu, 28 Feb 2002, Jos De_Roo wrote:

> > On Wed, 2002-02-27 at 17:05, Pat Hayes wrote:
>
> > > Then we can just say that for literals E, I(E) = E, and not
> > > talk about things like LV and XL at all. Does anyone have any
> > > philosophical objections to this? It would allow quite a few of the
> > > lemmas to be stated with fewer qualifications, and the proofs to be
> > > simplified.
>
> no objection, just praise

Absolute agreement. I sent something like this to the list ages ago: see

	http://ioctl.org/rdf/literals

which demonstrates how you can do tidy literals and support XSD
datatypes - (and you'd probably implement it using something akin to
jena's pair mechanism).


-- 
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
I am now available for general use under a modified BSD licence.
Received on Friday, 1 March 2002 05:03:57 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:46:12 EDT