Joshua Allen wrote: >>>I agree that the restriction on URIs in the subject in RDF is a mistake. >>> >>> >>>I forgot what happened to that comment process wise. >>> >>> >>It was a language extension that we did not feel was justified by the >>charter and/or specific difficulties with RDF as defined. Generally, >> >> >it > >This makes me nervous. We are already finding it very difficult to >prevent people from using URIs in ambiguous ways; it seems we are >inviting people to get even more confused if we allow literals. > >Can't people just mint a URI to stand in for a literal, if they want to >assert about that literal? > > Hmmm.... data:text/plain,some%20percent%20escaped%20literal%20value Seems a bit ugly... and has probably been suggested before. Stuart --Received on Friday, 29 October 2004 09:23:57 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 12 September 2008 07:02:04 GMT