- From: Bradley Allen <bradley.p.allen@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2011 16:24:16 -0700
- To: Gregg Kellogg <gregg@kellogg-assoc.com>
- Cc: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>, Linked JSON <public-linked-json@w3.org>
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 3:10 PM, Gregg Kellogg <gregg@kellogg-assoc.com> wrote: > This is a great re-formulation of what I believe we were trying to attempt in the original definition and in the revision from the telecon. As is, I don't believe that any explicit mention of unlabled nodes is required, as it is implicit in the definition. Cool. > Where we didn't get on the telecon, and what isn't mentioned here, is the ability to have object nodes representing scalar values such as strings, dates, times, or anything else. To re-use a term, we might define such nodes a "literals". A _literal_ might be considered to be any labeled node where the label is not an IRI. We could then leave to subsequent definitions if a literal may have a datatype or a language. How about: "A literal is an object with a label that is not an IRI" ? - BPA Bradley P. Allen http://bradleypallen.org
Received on Tuesday, 5 July 2011 23:24:44 UTC