W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > November 1999

Re: Mime types, Literals == Resources

From: Seth Russell <seth@halcyon.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 08:55:06 -0800
Message-ID: <38397569.A2EE7D1F@halcyon.com>
To: RDF Intrest Group <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Pierre-Antoine CHAMPIN wrote:

> Jonas Liljegren wrote:
> > I suggest:
> >   - that ALL URI's representing retrievable data, will be considerd
> >     literals.
> >   - that each mime type will be a sub class to Literal
>
> Furthermore,
> I suggest that there be no more distinction between
>  triple(resource,resource,resource) and triple(resource,resource,litteral)
> but that RDF looking like
>
>  <rdf:Description about="http://somewhere.org/something">
>    <s:prop> This is a litteral </s:prop>
>  </rdf:Description>
>
> be translated something like
>
> triple( s:prop, http://somewhere.com/something, thisfile.rdf#genid1 )
>
> where "thisfile.rdf#genid1" whould have "This is a litteral" as CONTENT...
> which surely would raise some implementation issues left to discuss!
> Though, that looks sound to me.

Excuse me for asking what might seem to some like a really stupid question.
But suppose then we want to say something about "this literal" ... would we
then write:

<rdf:Description about="This is a litteral">
   <s:propB> Wanna take a bath</s:propB>
 </rdf:Description>

___OR___

<rdf:Description about="thisfile.rdf#genid1">
   <s:propB>Wanna take a bath</s:propB>
 </rdf:Description>

Seth Russell
http://RobustAI.Net/ai/symknow.htm
Received on Monday, 22 November 1999 11:25:40 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:42 GMT