W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > January 2010

Re: Explicit RDF property for "literal has datatype D"?

From: Jiří Procházka <ojirio@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 04 Jan 2010 03:43:46 +0100
Message-ID: <4B4155E2.40507@gmail.com>
To: Jeremy Carroll <jeremy@topquadrant.com>
CC: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>, Toby A Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>, Christoph LANGE <ch.lange@jacobs-university.de>, Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>, Siarhei Uladzimiravich Kuryla <s.kuryla@jacobs-university.de>
Sorry for resurrecting this old thread, but I just stumbled upon this:

"rdfs:Datatype is both an instance of and a subclass of rdfs:Class. Each
instance of rdfs:Datatype is a subclass of rdfs:Literal."

"A typed literal is an instance of a datatype class."

citing http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-schema/#ch_datatype

So I think this is valid:

_:x rdf:type xsd:date .
_:x owl:sameAs "2008-01-01" .

Quite confusing, but might be useful for RDF systems which treat
literals as just one "type" (type from their point of view).

Shame there is no such thing for language tags, or is there?

Best,
Jiri Prochazka

On 07/06/2009 07:43 PM, Jeremy Carroll wrote:
> Pat Hayes wrote:
>>>
>>>> p a rdf:Property ;
>>>>  rdfs:domain rdfs:Literal ;
>>>>  rdfs:range rdfs:Datatype .
>>>
>>
>>
>> _:x p xsd:date .
>> _:x :seenAsLiteral  "2008-01-01" .
> I tend to write these examples as
> 
> _:x p xsd:date .
> _:x owl:sameAs  "2008-01-01" .
> 
> Semantically that has a literal as the subject, and it works around the
> legacy syntactic restriction
> 
> Unfortunately the reasoning required to make this work means that simple
> RDF systems may well not get it.
> 
> Jeremy
> 
> 
> 


Received on Monday, 4 January 2010 02:44:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:48:04 UTC