RE: [xml-dev] URIs are simply names was:Re:[xml-dev]"Abstract"URIs

I guess that if people are interested in this, conversation should take
place in RDF-interest.

| -----Original Message-----
| From: Patrick Stickler [mailto:patrick.stickler@nokia.com] 

| On 2002-02-19 16:59, "ext Manos Batsis" <m.batsis@bsnet.gr> wrote:
 
| > Take RDF for example, (AFAIK and even worse, last time I 
| checked) where
| > literals cannot be subjects in a sentence (triple). This 
| essentially has
| > to do with the RDF model; a literal there is just that; what if the
| > system was able to uniquely identify this literal and refer 
| to it with a
| > *unique* URI; all implemented features applicable to 
| resources would be
| > available for literals as well.
| 
| I don't see the point. Do you wish to talk about an occurrence
| of a literal? A concrete example would help.

Sorry about that; in short, I would like to see RDF having [resource] at
the top of the object hierarchy, where literals are also treated as
subclasses of [resource] and  of some primitive type probably taken by
the xsd namespace. This is common:

 :manos xx:age "22".

How about

"22" aa:typeOf xsd:int

Of cource the above idea crashes when we add this to the picture

:mySweater xx:label "22"

"22" aa:typeOf xsd:string

We have a conflict.



Ok, from scratch. How about this:

:mySweater xx:label xsd.string:22


There are no conflicts; for example

:foo1 xx:size xsd.int:22

:foo2 xx:heightInCm xsd.int:22

:mySweater xx:label xsd.string:22


I'm trying to deal with primitives as unique resources because I see
them as such; the difference is they are not addressable as URLs, since
a string "ab" is unique, as any string or number or any other primitive.
So above, xx:size and xx:heightInCm have the same resource as an object;
that resource is the unique "literal of type int:22".

Would something like the above ban literals as used today in the RDF
model, while introducing the primitive_typing mechanism as most
anticipate it?

Kindest regards,

Manos

PS: no I don't speak n3 so :-)