- From: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
- Date: Sun, 11 Aug 2002 14:31:38 +0100
- To: Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com
- Cc: <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
At 07:05 PM 8/9/02 +0300, Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com wrote: >I would like the proponents of the recent proposal for >a new datatyped literal node type to justify why URIs >cannot be used. I believe there is a strong technical reason why URIs don't work here. According to the model theory (http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-mt/#sinterp), URIs can denote anything according to the interpretation that is used. There is no provision for treating different classes of URIrefs differently in this respect. Conversely (and as Jan pointed out long time ago - http://ioctl.org/rdf/literals) a literal is a fixed value, not subject to reinterpretation according to the "possible world" being described. (It might be possible to redraw the model theory to use URIs in the way you suggest, but I think that would be a far greater disruption than what is being proposed.) #g ------------------- Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org>
Received on Sunday, 11 August 2002 11:01:40 UTC