W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-comments@w3.org > January to March 2002

RE: Proposed NTriples changes for literal notation

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 09:48:53 -0000
To: "Seth Russell" <seth@robustai.net>, "Patrick Stickler" <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>, "ext Tim Berners-Lee" <timbl@w3.org>, "RDF Comments" <www-rdf-comments@w3.org>
Cc: "RDF Core" <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <JAEBJCLMIFLKLOJGMELDEEGBCDAA.jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>

Tim:
> > > I hope that RDF will move toward unicode strings as primitives, and
> > > langauges as properties.  { "chat"en  =  [lang:en "chat"].}
> >
> > This would, of course, require untidy literals, and we just decided
> > to make literals tidy.
> >
> > If languages as properties, in conjuction with literals as subjects,
> > is truly is a desirable feature in the future, should we rethink tidy
> > literals?
> >
> > If literals remain tidy, then that closes the door on languages
> > as properties.
>
> There must be some other assumption here; because we *can* have tidy
> literals and { "chat"en  =  [lang:en "chat"].} and not use literals as
> subjects just by letting the xml:lang attribute entail the extra Bnode.
>

Sorry I am flogging a dead horse.

Maybe, but using Tim's encoding (which I like), would be a lot easier if we
had chosen to follow Pat's

http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/users/phayes/simpledatatype2.html

instead of lumbering him with a specific reading for the S-B idiom.

From simpledatatype2:

[[[
Thus, a triple such as

Jenny ex:age "35" .

in effect means that the value of the property is something that can be
indicated by the literal label. RDFS provides a way to say this explicitly:

Jenny ex:age _:x .
_:x rdfs:dlex "35" .

where the second triple asserts simply that _:x is a value which can be
represented by the character string. This does not in itself 'fix' the
value, of course, but it can be used as a way of making the association
between the value and a lexical form explicit, for later use or
amplification. We will call this a lexical form triple. A useful way to
think of the meaning of rdfs:dlex is: "..can be described by the character
string.." or "..can be a value of the literal..."

These two forms - the single triple with a literal as object, and the
similar triple with a bnode as object, together with a lexical form triple
linking the bnode to the literal - are identical in meaning and can be
substituted freely for one another. The first is obviously more compact and
often easier to 'read', but the second form provides distinct nodes for the
literal itself and for its value, which is sometimes useful.

]]]

One time useful is to encode language.

e.g.


Jenny ex:age "35"en-US .

<==>

Jenny ex:age _:x .
_:x rdfs:dlex "35" .
_:x rdfs:lang "en_US" .


Flogging a dead horse

Jeremy
Received on Friday, 15 March 2002 04:50:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 21 September 2012 14:16:30 GMT