Re: a few questions about literals

At 17:05 27/02/2002 -0600, Pat Hayes wrote:
>Guys, I started drafting a new version of the MT to reflect our 
>staked-down decision that literals always denote themselves. This 
>simplifies (and clarifies) the graph syntax and the basic MT,  but it 
>could be done in several different ways, so I wonder if anyone has any 
>strong views on any of the following question: should we allow literals to 
>entail bnodes ?

Good to be thinking about this and collecting data.  A couple of suggestions:

   o don't do too much work on it till we datatypes fully nailed; some 
issues did surface at the f2f.  I'm afraid they are not done yet :(

   o great to ask such clear questions, but best to wait for a collective 
group decision before implementing them

Brian