[Fwd: rdfms-literals-as-resources]

I was unaware of a length restriction on URI's.  Is there one?

Brian

Devon Smith wrote:
> 
> Let me first say that conceptually, i like the idea of literals being
> resources, mostly because i think one should be allowed to make
> assertions about literals. However, the data: scheme is an unacceptable
> solution to the problem of how to assign a URI to a string of
> characters. The length limit, recognized by the RFC, is a legitimate
> concern for implementors. Another concern is how strings encoded
> in UTF-8, UTF-16 and other non-ascii, non-latin encodings would be
> dealt with.
> 
> I can't think of an elegant way to make Literals be part of the Resource
> set. All I can see is a way to allow Literals to be treated as Resources
> when needed. One could use anonymous resources in conjunction with
> a property like "RDF:represents" to create a resource that represents
> a Literal.
> 
> <rdf:Description rdf:about="genid">
>         <rdf:represents>Some insightful quote</rdf:represents>
>         <a:attributedTo>Some insightful woman</a:attributedTo>
> </rdf:Description>

Received on Saturday, 4 August 2001 10:42:58 UTC