- From: Jeremy Carroll <jeremy@topquadrant.com>
- Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2010 11:47:18 -0700
- To: Henry Story <henry.story@gmail.com>
- CC: Yves Raimond <yves.raimond@gmail.com>, Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>, Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>, David Booth <david@dbooth.org>, nathan@webr3.org, Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>, Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>, Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>
> On 1 Jul 2010, at 17:38, Jeremy Carroll wrote: > >> >> >> I have loads and loads of code, both open source and commercial that assumes throughout that a node in a subject position is not a literal, and a node in a predicate position is a URI node. On 7/1/2010 8:46 AM, Henry Story wrote: > but is that really correct? Because bnodes can be names for literals, and so you really do have > literals in subject positions.... No? It is really correct that I have loads and loads of such code. This code conforms with the RDF Concepts and Abstract Syntax Recommendation 2004 Jeremy
Received on Thursday, 1 July 2010 18:48:03 UTC