untidy nodes [Was: email straw poll: literal semantics proposals]

[...]

> Thus, if
>
>     Node a = Node.createLiteral("foo");
>     Node b = Node.createLiteral("foo");
>
> actually resulted in the nodes having the internal labels of
> _:x"foo" and _:y"foo" then the existing implementation of
> the equals() method based on simple string-equality of labels
> would function as expected and conclude a != b as it should.

well, isn't that a "hidden" C or D?
and it is exactly how we (in euler) did our untidy literals experiment
-- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Sep/0347.html
-- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Sep/0355.html
so in that case we have a node, which is a pair
and the literal part of that pair is a string (which
can be interned to perform in an optimal way) and
the other half of the pair was a uri-dt (which could
actually maybe better be defaulted with the property
itself, and care could be taken for subproperties
as well), but it is all implicit and a hidden C or D
and the primitive bare literal is lost or we have all
turtles down the road (or something like that)

-- ,
Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/