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

RE: Datatyping, reification, syntactic tidyness

From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2002 13:48:37 +0100
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20020911134320.02c7baa8@0-mail-1.hpl.hp.com>
To: "Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, "Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>

At 14:14 11/09/2002 +0200, Jeremy Carroll wrote:

> >
> >
> > >And I buy Guha's point at the Bristol F2F that with untidy
> > literal semantics
> > >rdf:object refers to the syntax of the triple not its semantics.
> >
> > That is reopening an old issue where I believe we have already
> > decided the
> > value of the reification properties do not denote the syntax.
> >
> > Are you suggesting this treatment be special for rdf:object?
> > Just when it
> > takes a literal value?
>
>No, I think you have misunderstood. I am not reopening any issues.


Forgive me for not being clear.  Given your statement:

   [[
      rdf:object refers to the syntax of the triple not its semantics.
   ]]

Given:

   <rdf:Description rdf:bagID="bar" rdf:about="http://example.org/foo">
     <eg:foobar rdf:resource="http://example.org/bar"/>
   </rdf:Description>

are you suggesting that equivalent triples include

   _:stmt <rdf:object> "http://example.org/bar" .

Brian
Received on Wednesday, 11 September 2002 08:50:59 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:50:58 EDT