- From: Josh Sled <jsled@asynchronous.org>
- Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 09:00:40 -0500
- To: Joshua Allen <joshuaa@microsoft.com>
- Cc: semantic-web@w3.org
On Sun, 2005-03-13 at 23:16, Joshua Allen wrote:
> I˙ve decided that I want to use URI object values for my Boolean
> triples, rather than the literals ´true/falseĦ. In other words,
> instead of:
[deletia]
> I can find zero examples of the latter; only the former. But I think
> the latter is right. Why am I wrong?
I'm not so sure I care about the "well you should be modeling it
different" thread or inference support or "strong typing". I was under
the impression that data-typing serves as a mechanism to identify the
process to convert a string representation into a particular value.
That typing data is either built into the processing software, inferred
from schema or explicit in the data...
In the explicit case, it would seem weird to me that all other typed
literal values (int, float, "number", "base64-jpeg", &c.) would use the
datatyping mechanism, whereas booleans specifically and strangely would
use URIs.
As counterpoint to your "we don't need URIS anywhere!" msg [1], should
all values become a URI?
http://example.org/xsd/dateTime/2005-03-17T08:58:00-05:00 ?
http://example.org/number/123456.789 ?
[...] ?
Why are booleans special?
...jsled
[1] mid 0E36FD96D96FCA4AA8E8F2D199320E5204883A46@RED-MSG-43.redmond.corp.microsoft.com
--
http://asynchronous.org/ - `a=jsled; b=asynchronous.org; echo ${a}@${b}`
Received on Thursday, 17 March 2005 14:01:12 UTC