W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > September 2003

Re: relationship of rdfs:Literal to rdfs:Resource

From: Garret Wilson <garret@globalmentor.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 18:33:23 -0700
Message-ID: <3F763A63.7050600@globalmentor.com>
To: Benja Fallenstein <b.fallenstein@gmx.de>
Cc: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>, Graham Klyne <gk@ninebynine.org>, www-rdf-interest@w3.org

Benja Fallenstein wrote:

> Hei,
> 
> Garret Wilson wrote:
> 
>> You're right---some resources may be in both sets, but the result is 
>> perhaps worse---there's no way to know from the framework which 
>> resources are the same. I could be talking about "Garret Wilson" and 
>> "uri:x-people-garretwilson", but are those the same resources? Who knows?
> 
> 
> Now that was a decidedly bad example ;-)
> 
> Someone who assigns a URI like "uri:x-people-garretwilson" to denote not 
> a person, but the *character string* G-a-r-r-e-t-_-W-i-l-s-o-n is doing 
> something really misleading :-)

Nope, sorry Benja, you misread the example. I'm referring to the 
resource denoted by the lexical form "Garret Wilson". Here's the whole 
thing again:

<rdf:Description rdf:about="uri:x-example-document">
   <dc:creator>Garret Wilson</dc:creator>
</rdf:Description>

"...But if I talk about the resource identified by the literal, "Garret 
Wilson," why can't I use a URI as well? ... I could be talking about 
'Garret Wilson' and 'uri:x-people-garretwilson', but are those the same 
resources? Who knows?"

Never ever did I say that "uri:x-people-garretwilson" denoted a 
character string. Similarly Ora Lassila didn't use the URI 
"http://www.w3.org/staffId/85740" to refer to the character string "Ora 
Lassila" back in 1999 (see 
http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-rdf-syntax-19990222/#basic ).

All the best,

Garret
Received on Saturday, 27 September 2003 21:33:49 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:52:02 GMT