W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > August 2001

RE: completion of action: 2001-07-27#2 (long)

From: Bill de hÓra <bdehora@interx.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2001 17:43:53 +0100
To: "'pat hayes'" <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>, <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <69B15B675E99D411A4110008C786DA2301E97CAB@exwest_01.interx.com>

:> dehora
:>The basic data model consists of four object types:
: pat hayes
:Not sure what 'object type' refers to here. Are we talking about
:syntax or about interpretations? If the latter, are we assuming that
:resources *cannot* have literal values? If so, I will need to revise
:the MT somewhat.

I cut and paste that from the M&S. The current text is (2.1 p3):

"The basic data model consists of three object types:"

Under that, in the Resources description, there's this:

"[...] A resource may also be an object that
is not directly accessible via the Web; e.g.
a printed book. [...]"

Probably not to be confused with this wording in the
Statements description:

"[...] The object of a statement (i.e., the property
value) can be another resource [...]"

Almost all other uses of "object" in the M&S are that of the
object of statement. There's some use of object as in OO in
the section discussing containers.

Replace it with :

"The basic data model consists of the following types:"


:>The most primitive value type represented in RDF, typically a
:string of
:>characters [XXX: 7-bit US-ASCII?
:7-bit?? Yech. Très malheûreux. Why not use UTF-8 ?

Indeed. I took my cue from n-triples (because the MT refers to
n-triples); in fairness Unicode encoding is still an open issue
for n-triples.

:>as per n-triple/model theory?]. Literals are
:>distinguished from Resources in that the RDF model does not
:permit literals to
:>be the subject of a statement.
:Wait a minute. The subject is a URI, not a Resource, right?
:The Resource is what the subject (a piece of syntax)
:denotes, not the subject itself.

Again, that text was lifted out of the M&S
(glossary, non-normative, mind):

"[...] Literals are distinguished from Resources in that
the RDF model does not permit literals to be the subject
of a statement. [...]"

:For what its worth, about the only requirement from the MT is that
:literals must be clearly distinguishable from uriRefs (or URIs). Just
:allowing arbitrary charstrings wouldn't cut it, therefore.

That's interesting. I don't think there's any such restriction
on literals currently. Let me check on that for you. I guess the
idea has been that the machine is supposed to figure things out
from production forks/cues in whatever the grammar happens to be,
such as parseType for the XML.

Bill de hÓra
Received on Tuesday, 28 August 2001 12:44:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:24:03 UTC