Re: Terminology: How to call "IRI or blank node"?

On 12/19/14, 7:04 AM, Axel Polleres wrote:
> "Non-literal RDF Terms" is probably too bulky?

"Non-literal nodes" may work better, but it's still not what I am 
looking for. I would like to be able to concisely express "an engine 
that checks all constraints for a given X" where X is either a "IRI or 
blank node". Is there no shorter term for that? Most people outside of 
formal W3C documents seem to use "Resource" for X, whether we like that 
or not as spec writers. Even worse, you can instantiate the root class 
rdfs:Resource and use rdfs:Resource in example snippets and Turtle files 
of the system vocabulary delivered by this WG, yet it is a "forbidden" 
term in the prose of the spec.

Holger


>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> (sent from my mobile)
> --
> Prof. Axel Polleres, WU
> url: http://www.polleres.net/  twitter: @AxelPolleres
>
> On Dec 18, 2014, at 21:58, Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com 
> <mailto:holger@topquadrant.com>> wrote:
>
>> Given that a lot of people equate "Resource" with "IRI or blank 
>> node", what would be an alternative term that groups together these 
>> two node types (excluding literals)?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Holger
>>
>>