RE: Proposal for abstract syntax representation of inline literals (was Re: weekly call for agenda items)

> >
> > This is the usual weekly call for agenda items.  Please can I
> have any by
> > noon uk time Thursday please.
> >
> > On my list of possibles I have:
> >
> >   o abstract syntax - I'd prefer a whole proposal rather than specific
> > questions
>
>

Sorry, I missed the deadline ...


I suggest an abstract syntax along the lines of:

An RDF Literal Node can be labelled with one of:

- an RDF String Literal (as now)
- an RDF XML Literal  (as now)
- a value from the value space of a datatype.

We simply note that an implementation that is unaware of a specific datatype
used in an RDF/XML document will need to store the datatype URI + lexical
form pair as a fall-back.

An RDF Graph contains precisely one triple for each Literal node in the
graph.

[As I have previously indicated this extreme syntactic untidiness is
practically indistinguishable from extreme tidiness, but leaves Pat more
room to wriggle.]

I will send another e-mail, replying to this to motivate the use of values
rather than Patrick's preference for pairs.

Jeremy