- From: Arthur Ryman <arthur.ryman@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 18:32:31 -0400
- To: "public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org" <public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org>
Peter, Please explain the benefit of using literals of type xsd:anyURI instead of IRIs. The downside is that you'd have to explicitly convert the literals to IRIs in typical SPARQL queries using IRI() or URI(). This could be very awkward. -- Arthur On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 11:34 PM, Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com> wrote: > Spawning off a thread on the choice of using xsd:anyURI. I anticipate it is > pretty obvious which syntax most users would prefer: > > shacl:classScope"http://example.org/Person"^^xsd:anyURI ; > > or > > shacl:classScope ex:Person ; > > so maybe you should clarify why you made that suggestion. You quoted > "representational purity" and "to separate use and mention" but as a WG > member I would not want to receive death threats from users who are no > longer allowed to write qnames in their Turtle and JSON-LD files :) > > So what practical problems do you anticipate if they would be proper IRI > nodes? > > Thanks, > Holger > > > On 3/4/2015 13:32, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: >> >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> I have attached a couple of examples. (They get too messed up if I put >> them >> in line.) >> >> peter >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- >> Version: GnuPG v1 >> >> iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJU9ny/AAoJECjN6+QThfjzaeAH/0AItq5S/KPjsVuW3vbSx3aM >> e3xYRm6nu8p1ulpt3PQdXNpX3O+FsdQigYEMFkUEEl3YyOgaJBOLqVXJI0mjqZyw >> xo/GvnH1vmH+05qSHs/yq1N20+GbzdXoYjlGuvIpMKSig57ktv8DigqcU48hwgFw >> p/Qqq4iDk0UKuno3tZohlCR4akXWuHyn3udSo1rWsVYldcoV7oBlDyAME3RhrK/C >> 0TteBPBuKOdAc9DdwOAbXqB3dxCApveCp6kwEa/stMWJ/QQz3NnvhIO/KMPeNJRC >> 7S6S144Tie2WFNsDgfHiCEhXxR0FZYWsWAyz7FV7xODI42VGSpYVmSxCdiqm/8I= >> =XS8w >> -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > >
Received on Tuesday, 17 March 2015 22:32:58 UTC