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

Re: Literals as Resources (was RE: draft partitioning of the issues)

From: Aaron Swartz <me@aaronsw.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 23:44:27 -0500
Cc: "Brian McBride" <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, "rdf core" <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
To: "Ron Daniel" <rdaniel@interwoven.com>
Message-Id: <20010629044427.UALA13566.femail18.sdc1.sfba.home.com@localhost>
On Thursday, June 28, 2001, at 11:22  AM, Ron Daniel wrote:

> While I would prefer that we have a way to make literals
> the subject of statements, it seems completely clear that
> such a feature is NOT part of the 1.0 M&S.

As I have stated and will repeat, I have never seen the M&S 
state that Literals and Resources are disjoint.

> But Aaron's suggestion that we convert literals into occurances
> of data: URLs is CLEARLY a change to the model. I am not at all
> convinced this is a real simplification. We already have an
> incredible mess around URIs to clean up. I don't see adding
> something like such an automagic conversion as any sort of
> real simplification, I'm afraid it is just going to make things
> worse.

Is this just a gut instinct, or do you have actual facts to back 
this up? Let's judge the proposal on its merits, not on FUD or 
how it sounds. Personally, in my work as an RDF user I feel that 
the change would be a powerful simplification.

> I am, of course, willing to abide by the rule of the majority
> if the group decides such a change is in-scope. But before
> this group spends its resources on this issue, postponing
> other issues we must consider, may I request a straw poll
> on the level of support?

I, of course, am strongly in favor of the proposal.

[ "Aaron Swartz" ; <mailto:me@aaronsw.com> ; <http://www.aaronsw.com/> ]
Received on Friday, 29 June 2001 00:44:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:24:02 UTC