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

RE: rdfs:StringLiteral and rdfs:XMLLiteral

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 13:52:20 +0200
To: "Dave Beckett" <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
Cc: <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <BHEGLCKMOHGLGNOKPGHDKEHKCAAA.jjc@hpl.hp.com>


At a guess ...

<rdfs:Datatype rdf:about="&rdfs;XMLLiteral">
  <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="&rdfs;Literal">
</rdfs:Datatype>
<rdfs:Datatype rdf:about="&rdfs;StringLiteral">
  <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="&rdfs;Literal">
</rdfs:Datatype>

the subClassOf relationship depends partly on whether the model theory
contains a rule that turns any datatype into a subclass of rdfs:Literal. I
am neutral as to whether it should or not. If there isn't such a rule then
maybe we would want to rename StringLiteral as Literal and not have the
subClassOf relationships at all.

I can take an action to add label and description properties to these if
this proposal is still alive after the telecon!

Jeremy

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dave Beckett [mailto:dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk]
> Sent: 25 October 2002 12:14
> To: Jeremy Carroll
> Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
> Subject: rdfs:StringLiteral and rdfs:XMLLiteral
>
>
>
> Can you please construct some proposed RDF/XML vocab for these, for
> Dan Brickley to add to the RDF Vocab doc, for the WG to see.
>
> I expect they are both rdf:type rdfs:Datatype yes?
>
> Dave
>
Received on Friday, 25 October 2002 07:52:31 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:52:30 EDT