- From: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 11:22:30 -0700
- To: Aaron Swartz <me@aaronsw.com>
- Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
>On Thursday, July 12, 2001, at 04:25 PM, pat hayes wrote: > >>>A literal is a resource representing the literal -- the string. >> >>Sorry, I can't follow this (in fact, I can't even parse it :-). Do >>you mean a literal is a resource that represents *itself* ? > >Yes, I think so. Sorry if I was confusing. > >>Can you expand on what you mean a little more, maybe with a simple >>example? Thanks. > ><data:,foo> merely represents the characters 'f', 'o', and 'o' in >order. It does not represent a concept, thing, etc. It means nothing >more than those three characters. > >Does that make more sense? Yes. That is what I would use quotation for: "foo" means those three characters in that order. OK, so <data:, ..... > is a way of quoting, thanks for the clarification. However, maybe I was wrong, but I have been assuming that 'literal' referred not only to <data:..> but also to things like <string:..> and <integer:....>, ie data types more generally (??). If so, I think it wouldnt be correct to say that all of these only denote themsleves, eg something labelling an integer wouldn't actually be an integer. Pat --------------------------------------------------------------------- (650)859 6569 w (650)494 3973 h (until September) phayes@ai.uwf.edu http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes
Received on Friday, 13 July 2001 14:22:37 UTC