- From: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
- Date: Tue, 02 Mar 2010 08:58:02 -0500
- To: Manos Batsis <manos_lists@geekologue.com>
- Cc: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>, Damian Steer <pldms@mac.com>, Svante Schubert <Svante.Schubert@sun.com>, Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>
On Tue, 2010-03-02 at 13:02 +0200, Manos Batsis wrote: > Danny Ayers wrote: > > But Damian, what do you think about literals as resources? > > > > From my limited perspective, it seems like all the places in the triple > > should have equal weighting - but I could be very wrong about that. > > > > On a perfect world, everything would have a URI (/IRI) but these lumps > > of text - what do you reckon? > > Bingo. So if one wants to emulate the flexibility of XTM, all that is > required to do it in RDF is to promote literals to subjects using URIs. > For example "foobar" can be http://my-literal-to-subject.com/foobar This is quite reminiscent of using http://thing-described-by.org?http://dbooth.org/2005/dbooth/ to automatically 303-redirect to http://dbooth.org/2005/dbooth/ . The approach you suggest would work well for simple strings that are compatible with URI syntax, but for more general strings it would be quite cumbersome, as characters not permitted in the URI would have to be escaped. Also, to take advantage of this convention, the consuming RDF processor would have to additional logic to understand that http://my-literal-to-subject.com/foobar stands for the string "foobar", whereas the owl:sameAs workaround requires only standard OWL semantics. So I suspect that the owl:sameAs workaround will end up being easier overall in most cases. -- David Booth, Ph.D. Cleveland Clinic (contractor) Opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Cleveland Clinic.
Received on Tuesday, 2 March 2010 13:58:30 UTC