RE: Non-Text Literals

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Bill de hÓra [mailto:dehora@eircom.net]
> Sent: 31 August, 2002 15:14
> To: Stickler Patrick (NMP/Tampere); ashley@semantic.org;
> www-rdf-interest@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Non-Text Literals
> 
> 
> Ashley,
> 
> > What's the best way to do this?
> 
> Don't inline the photo as a literal.  Give the photograph a URL and
> associate it with you:
> 
>   <rdf:RDF
>     xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
>     xmlns="http://semantic.org/whatever#"
>   <Person>
>     <name>Ashley Yakeley</name>
>     <email>ashley@semantic.org</email>
>     <photo rdf:resource="http://..."/>
>   </Person>
>   </rdf:RDF>
> 
> 
> That way you don't need types or b64 embedded literals and no-one else
> needs to know your conventions for lifting jpegs out of literals; they
> just need to know HTTP if they want to see the picture.
> 
> > Patrick Stickler:
> > Hopefully soon there will be a published WD from the RDF Core 
> > WG which will discuss this kind of datatyped literal in detail.
> 
> Patrick, I was hoping the wg would encourage us to give 
> things URIs and
> put them on the web, instead of trying to tunnel them through literals
> via another type system. 

Well, I thought to, but decided to answer the specific question
that was being asked, presuming that there were good reasons for
capturing the image as a literal rather than simply referring to 
it by URI. I.e., I was taking it as a technical question, rather
than a methodology question.

But, yes, I agree the more optimal methodology would be to give the
image a URI and reference it thus.

Patrick



> Bill de hÓra 
> --
> Propylon
> www.propylon.com 
> 
>  
> 
>

Received on Monday, 2 September 2002 06:07:16 UTC