> On 2018-11 -21, at 22:40, David Booth <david@dbooth.org> wrote: > > 7. Literals as subjects. RDF should allow "anyone to say > anything about anything", but RDF does not currently allow > literals as subjects! (One work-around is to use -- you guessed > it -- a blank node, which in turn is asserted to be owl:sameAs > the literal.) This deficiency may seem unimportant relative > to other RDF difficulties, but it is a peculiar anomaly that > may have greater impact than we realize. Imagine an *average* > developer, new to RDF, who unknowingly violates this rule and > is puzzled when it doesn't work. Negative experiences like > that drive people away. Even more insidiously, imagine this > developer tries to CONSTRUCT triples using a SPARQL query, > and some of those triples happen to have literals in the > subject position. Per the SPARQL standard, those triples will > be silently eliminated from the results,[13] which could lead > to silently producing wrong answers from the application -- > the worst of all possible bugs. > Agreed. I thought we had fixed that in some later spec but I guess not. All code I have written, like cwm and rdflib.js, allows the same things in subject and object positions. Life is too short for arbitrary unnecessary asymmetry. timblReceived on Thursday, 22 November 2018 13:00:05 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 08:45:57 UTC