Re: Type of string literals in RDF

> On Nov 8, 2017, at 7:08 PM, Victor Porton <porton@narod.ru> wrote:
> 
> I am developing a rather complex RDF vocabulary.
> 
> Some data is in string format. For example, I use string literals to
> describe a Unix command to be executed by my software. Or for another
> example, I use strings to describe XSLT parameter names. Or to describe
> program version numbers such as "11.3".
> 
> My question: When validating an RDF file, should I check that these
> strings are of xsd:string type? or should I accept arbitrary types of
> such "string" literals?

For RDF compliance, the former. All RDF strings (aka ‘plain literals’) have the RDF type xsd:string. You may associate a different ‘type’ with the literal by an explicit assertion using your own type vocabulary, but that would be a modeling layer above RDF itself. 
> 
> What is better from the viewpoint of complex system design?

If you want to be compatible with other RDF data and RDF engines, only one choice is possible. 

Pat Hayes

> 
> 
>

Received on Tuesday, 14 November 2017 17:28:27 UTC