- From: Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>
- Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2010 12:12:54 +0000
- To: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@w3.org>
- Cc: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>, public-rdfa-wg@w3.org
On Mon, 2010-12-13 at 11:19 +0000, Harry Halpin wrote: > To my knowledge, I have not seen a single halfway convincing usecase > where there is a reason why you would want to 'mention' a URI, i.e. > refer to it as a literal or xsd string. Given the following: ### @prefix con: <http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/pim/contact#> . @prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> . <http://www.w3.org/People/Berners-Lee/card#i> con:preferredURI <http://www.w3.org/People/Berners-Lee/card#i> ; owl:sameAs <http://identi.ca/user/45563> . ### An OWL-capable processor can make the following conclusion: ### @prefix con: <http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/pim/contact#> . <http://www.w3.org/People/Berners-Lee/card#i> con:preferredURI <http://identi.ca/user/45563> . ### However, given: ### @prefix con: <http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/pim/contact#> . @prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> . <http://www.w3.org/People/Berners-Lee/card#i> con:preferredURI "http://www.w3.org/People/Berners-Lee/card#i" ; owl:sameAs <http://identi.ca/user/45563> . ### It will not come to a mistaken conclusion about what timbl's preferred URI for himself is. -- Toby A Inkster <mailto:mail@tobyinkster.co.uk> <http://tobyinkster.co.uk>
Received on Monday, 13 December 2010 12:13:43 UTC