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

On 12/20/14, 6:53 AM, Eric Prud'hommeaux wrote:
> * Arthur Ryman <ryman@ca.ibm.com> [2014-12-19 11:15-0500]
>> Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com> wrote on 12/18/2014 03:58:25 PM:
>>
>>> From: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
>>> To: public-data-shapes-wg <public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org>
>>> Date: 12/18/2014 04:04 PM
>>> Subject: Terminology: How to call "IRI or blank node"?
>>>
>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>> How about "subject node"?
> That could be confusing if we're also talking about the position of
> terms (e.g. subject). I propose for our internal purposes, we mint the
> term "NonLiteral". If we end up using that in the long-run, it will at
> least be intuitive and umambiguous.

We need a URI for that, so that we can say that "every value of a given 
property must be a resource". Basically a way to say "anything that can 
appear as a subject in a triple (and therefore can have its own 
properties). We have always used rdfs:Resource for that and it worked 
well in practice - and rdfs:Literal to say "every datatype". 
rdfs:NonLiteral does not exist. OWL had owl:ObjectProperty and 
owl:DatatypeProperty, and if you left their range empty then they had 
that default interpretation. How was this ever supposed to work in RDF 
Schema?

Holger

Received on Saturday, 20 December 2014 01:40:47 UTC