- From: Ron Daniel <rdaniel@interwoven.com>
- Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 00:15:00 -0700
- To: "Pat Hayes" <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Cc: <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Pat Hayes said: > [Ron Daniel said] > >2) In RDF 2, let each occurrence of a literal be a prince/b/whatever_node, > > identified in whatever way we decide to handle the things we used to > > call anonymous resources. > > I don't like that. I want to label the node with the literal itself, > just like we do now, not be forced into writing two nodes where one > will do. How would we tell the difference between homographs (e.g. 2001-10 as a month vs. an integer expression)? > So for example where we would now write > > aaa example:property lll . > > you want us to write > > aaa example:property _:1 . > _:1 rdf:value lll . > > and maybe also > > _:1 xml:lang "fr" . > > Nope, I object. Clunky and unnecessary. I want to be able to just write > > aaa example:property lll . > > or, if I really need to, in a slight extension of Ntriples: > > aaa example:property _:1:lll . > > _:1 xml:lang "fr" . > > "_:1:lll", by the way, is a node, identified in an Ntriple++ document > with a nodeID (formerly called a bNode :-) which is *not* blank, but > is labelled with a literal. > That Ntriples++ document indicates an RDF graph with three nodes > labelled aaa, lll, and "fr", and with two edges labelled with > example:property and xml:lang. So presumably if we have multiple "lll" literals, we would distinguish them with _:1:lll _:2:lll etc. ? Ron Daniel Jr. Standards Architect Tel: +1 415 778 3113 Fax: +1 415 778 3131 Email: rdaniel@interwoven.com Register for GearUp 2001, Oct. 9-12 The Year's Hottest Content Infrastructure Conference Visit www.interwoven.com/gearup2001
Received on Monday, 15 October 2001 03:17:26 UTC