W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > November 2010

Re: What would break, a question for implementors? (was Re: Is 303 really necessary?)

From: Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2010 14:17:55 +0000
To: joel sachs <jsachs@csee.umbc.edu>
Cc: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>, nathan@webr3.org, Ian Davis <me@iandavis.com>, Pete Johnston <Pete.Johnston@eduserv.org.uk>, Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20101110141755.37730f07@miranda.g5n.co.uk>
On Tue, 9 Nov 2010 17:04:44 -0500 (EST)
joel sachs <jsachs@csee.umbc.edu> wrote:

> I think we can, though we might not be properly understood, e.g.
> "Kingsley was great in Gandhi and Sexy Beast."
> 
> Wasn't this part of the summer's argument regarding literals as
> rdf:subjects , i.e.

But:

	"Kingsley" film:isStarOf <#SexyBeast> .
	"Kingsley" film:isStarOf <#Ghandi> .

is no more ambiguous than:

	<#SexyBeast> film:star "Kingsley" .
	<#Ghandi> film:star "Kingsley" .

And what exactly is ambiguous about the following example?

	"2010-11-10"^^xsd:date d:precedes "2010-11-11"^^xsd:date .

Whether an identifier is ambiguous and whether it's a literal are two
mostly orthogonal issues.

-- 
Toby A Inkster
<mailto:mail@tobyinkster.co.uk>
<http://tobyinkster.co.uk>
Received on Wednesday, 10 November 2010 14:18:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:29:51 UTC