- From: Hugh Glaser <hugh@glasers.org>
- Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2020 11:48:14 +0100
- To: Thomas Passin <tpassin@tompassin.net>
- Cc: Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>
+1 My rule of thumb is that you only use a literal as the object of a small number of particular sorts of predicate, which will have names such as foo:label or foo:date or foo:hasValue. If there is any indication in the predicate you are using that tells you what sort of literal it is (such as budget in your example), then the object should be a resource that has the literal as a property. > On 8 Jul 2020, at 02:41, Thomas Passin <tpassin@tompassin.net> wrote: > > ... > What I have seen time and again in modeling is that you start out thinking you can use a simple literal value, but later you find it needs to become a composite. Say you are modeling a project. It has a budget, and that's just a number, a literal value. But soon you need it to have a capital improvement component and a maintenance component, and you find you also need it split out into quarterly segments. Your nice simple literal has become a complicated construction. > > So you might as well plan on that happening, to make it easy when it does. > > TomP > ... -- Hugh 023 8061 5652
Received on Wednesday, 8 July 2020 10:48:35 UTC