W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-comments@w3.org > January to March 2001

rdf:value backwards? [was: a few issues...]

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 21:26:30 -0600
Message-ID: <3A8F40E6.C1C499D8@w3.org>
To: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
CC: www-rdf-logic@w3.org, www-rdf-comments@w3.org
Sandro Hawke wrote:
[...]
> 3.  Using the property rdf:value to link from a point in the value
>     space (eg 10) to a point in the lexical space (eg "10") seems
>     completely backwards.

Er... I think I remember how it got to be this way...

[I tried to confirm from the working group archives,
but my searches didn't find what I was after. Anyway... ]

RDF properties are sorta like OOP properties,
and one of the most popular names for a "just give
me the thing as a string" property is 'Value', as in:

[[[
Dim rs As ADODB.Recordset
rs("CompanyName") = "SomeCompany"
rs!CompanyName = "SomeCompany"

is actually a shortcut for:

Dim rs As ADODB.Recordset
rs.Fields("CompanyName").Value = "SomeCompany"
rs.Fields!CompanyName.Value = "SomeCompany"
]]]

--        Preparing Your Visual Basic 6.0 Applications For the Upgrade
to Visual Basic.NET
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/techart/vb6tovbdotnet.htm#vb6tovbdotnet_resolve
Sat, 17 Feb 2001 01:25:04 GMT

Since we're deciding whether to invest in the name rdf:value
or not, now is a good time to consider alternatives.
(I copy www-rdf-comments (a) to record the design
rationale for rdf:value as it is, and (b) to provide
an alternative should this issue be opened again
in the new RDF Core WG).

Probably a better choice would be toString, as in

[[[
 public String toString()

     Returns a string representation of the object. In general, the
toString method
     returns a string that "textually represents" this object. 
]]]

--        Class java.lang.Object
http://java.sun.com/products/jdk/1.1/docs/api/java.lang.Object.html#toString()


>   That's saying:
> 
>           the number 10 has a value which is the string "10"
> 
>     when the correct form (IMHO) is
> 
>           the number 10 has a lexical representation which is the
>           string "10"
> 
>     I know rdf:value is given in RDF M&S, but that doesn't make it
>     right.  We need a property lexicalRepresentation (and probably
>     canonicalLexicalRepresentation) to be clear here.  (One might
>     possibly consider rdf:value an inverse property of those, but I
>     think that's too vague to bother with.)
> 
>    -- Sandro Hawke

-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Saturday, 17 February 2001 22:26:34 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 21 September 2012 14:16:27 GMT