- From: Jan Grant <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 10:32:24 +0100 (BST)
- To: Aaron Swartz <me@aaronsw.com>
- cc: Libby Miller <Libby.Miller@bristol.ac.uk>, Alan Davies <aland@steltor.com>, Michael Arick <marick@cse.ucsc.edu>, RDF Calendar <www-rdf-calendar@w3.org>
On Mon, 25 Jun 2001, Aaron Swartz wrote: > On Friday, June 22, 2001, at 01:03 PM, Libby Miller wrote: > > > However, this problem could I think be resolved if in RDF literals were > > allowed to be the subjects of RDf statements, because then we could > > subclass a literal for date-time, and preserve the simplicity > > while keeping the structure. Aaron - does that sound right? > > I'm not certain that would help -- it really depends more on the > route we chose to add this feature. This does seem like a > somewhat tricky issue you're facing. The best way I can think > of is something like: > > <dtstart><DateTime rdf:value="W3CDTF goes here" /></dtstart> > > What do you think? Create DateTime as an rdfs:subClassOf rdf:Literal* and use that as the range of your dtstart property. Then hang on while we try to shovel some xml datatypes into RDF :-) jan * or rdfs:Literal, I forget which -- jan grant, ILRT, University of Bristol. http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/ Tel +44(0)117 9287163 Fax +44 (0)117 9287112 RFC822 jan.grant@bris.ac.uk Whose kung-fu is the best?
Received on Tuesday, 26 June 2001 05:33:21 UTC