Re: Requirements for a possible "RDF 2.0"

On Monday 18. January 2010 12:43:57 Axel Polleres wrote:
> As for units: Is there any reason why rdf:value could not solve your
>  problem? (Although I admit that it might not be as widely used and it
>  would be good to give it more weight, or resp. refine and push best
>  practices in this direction more)

Mainly that it has its complexity in the wrong places :-) (OK, I admit, I 
had forgotten about it, I have never seen anyone use it. Pragmatically, 
when something has so many use cases, yet seen very little use, it is often 
because its design is flawed).

The unit is a property of the literal, not a property of the resource. By 
requiring another node, it makes it harder to query, harder to write, 
harder to read and harder to understand. 

Also, how would you formulate a conversion between units (e.g. lb to kg)? 
Or use derived units (e.g. watt = joule / second)? That's complexity we 
should tackle, not additional triples.

Cheers,

Kjetil
-- 
Kjetil Kjernsmo
kjetil@kjernsmo.net
http://www.kjetil.kjernsmo.net/

Received on Monday, 18 January 2010 16:29:04 UTC