- From: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 13:00:33 +0200
- To: "Bijan Parsia" <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
- Cc: "Story Henry" <henry.story@bblfish.net>, "Michael Schneider" <m_schnei@gmx.de>, semantic-web@w3.org, jjc@hpl.hp.com
On 14/08/07, Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> On 14 Aug 2007, at 10:24, Story Henry wrote:
>
> >
> > Does the current standard not in fact allow graphs through the use
> > of XML/RDF literals? If an RDF document contains a relation
> > pointing to an RDF/XML literal, then that RDF/XML is playing
> > somewhat the role of a graph, no? I mean it is opaque in the same
> > way a graph is...
> [snip]
>
[snip]
I brought this up somewhere fairly recently and someone (thought it
might have been idickinson on #jena, but apparently not...), pointed
me to Jena Assemblers which use this kind of thing, e.g.
eg:literal-content-example
ja:literalContent "_:it dc:title 'Interesting Times'"
.
http://jena.sourceforge.net/assembler/assembler-howto.html
> A solution, nevertheless, worth investigating.
Yup.
Cheers,
Danny.
--
http://dannyayers.com
Received on Tuesday, 14 August 2007 11:00:40 UTC