- From: <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
- Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 22:07:44 +0100
- To: phayes@ai.uwf.edu
- Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Pat, you remember the test case given in "interpretation properties" i.e. <http://www.w3.org/> <http://example.org/play#xml-cannonicalized> _:bNode1 . _:bNode1 <http://example.org/enc#hash-sha-1> _:bNode2 . _:bNode2 <http://example.org/enc#base64> "jd8734djr08347jyd4" . Another testcase is <http://example.org/play#poleq1> <http://example.org/play#root> _:bNode1 . _:bNode1 <http://example.org/complex-number#real-part> _:bNode2 . _:bNode2 <http://example.org/enc#IEEE-754> "3" . _:bNode1 <http://example.org/complex-number#imaginary-part> _bNode3 . _:bNode3 <http://example.org/enc#IEEE-754> "4" . So I think one could always *describe* the real/abstract things and "4" is *not* the floating point number 4 ... the node with label _:bNode3 is standing for that 4 and <http://example.org/enc#IEEE-754> "4" is a means to that end and not an end in its own :-) So I still think the "" delimited thing is just a string and I also don't think there will be a shortage of bNodes :-) Also the "nesting" capability shown in the first testcase is an interesting feature, isn't it? Of course I agree to distinguish between a bnode and its label. -- Jos
Received on Wednesday, 17 October 2001 16:18:04 UTC