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

Re: Subjects as Literals, [was Re: The Ordered List Ontology]

From: Nathan <nathan@webr3.org>
Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2010 05:49:31 +0100
Message-ID: <4C2D6FDB.8000500@webr3.org>
To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
CC: Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>, Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>
Pat Hayes wrote:
> On Jul 1, 2010, at 11:18 AM, Yves Raimond wrote:
>> "A literal may be the object of an RDF statement, but not the subject
>> or the predicate."
> Just to clarify, this is a purely syntactic restriction. Allowing 
> literals in subject position would require **no change at all** to the 
> RDF semantics. (The non-normative inference rules for RDF and RDFS and 
> D-entailment given in the semantics document would need revision, but 
> they would then be simplified.)

I have to wonder then, what can one all place in the s,p,o slots without 
changing the RDF semantics? literal and bnode predicates for instance? 
variables or formulae as in n3?

read as: if a new serialization/syntax was defined for RDF what are the 
limitations for the values of node/object and relationship specified by 
the RDF Semantics?



ps: apologies if this is a dumb question, I fear i'd still be hear next 
year trying to answer it myself though ;)
Received on Friday, 2 July 2010 04:50:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:48:11 UTC