W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > May 2011

Re: Proposal for ISSUE-12, string literals

From: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 22:47:10 +0100
Cc: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>, Alex Hall <alexhall@revelytix.com>, RDF Working Group WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <456999DE-F5BC-4344-B92F-2CDF13574766@garlik.com>
To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
On 2011-05-13, at 21:49, Pat Hayes wrote:
> Advantages: Gives a type to plain literals; preserves rdf:PlainLIteral specs (extending them, but not contradicting them); allows people to use plain literals without getting involved with trailing @; and allows xsd:string to be deprecated in favor of plain literal syntax (or the reverse, of course.) 
> Disadvantages: might be thought too complicated; takes the notion of type slightly outside the current RDF datatype specs.  
> Thoughts?

A lot of this complexity seems to stem from trying to make "foo" be an xsd:string. Instead why no go with Plan A and make "foo"^^xsd:string a plain literal.

xsd:strings are significantly rarer than plain literals in realworld RDF data (in my experience), so it's less weird overall to de-type xsd:strings, than to try and add a type to every plain literal.

It's not the prettiest solution but probably RDF shouldn't have had explicit xsd:strings in the first place.

- Steve

Steve Harris, CTO, Garlik Limited
1-3 Halford Road, Richmond, TW10 6AW, UK
+44 20 8439 8203  http://www.garlik.com/
Registered in England and Wales 535 7233 VAT # 849 0517 11
Registered office: Thames House, Portsmouth Road, Esher, Surrey, KT10 9AD
Received on Friday, 13 May 2011 21:47:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:04:06 UTC