- From: <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>
- Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2002 14:11:44 +0300
- To: <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>
- Cc: <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
> -----Original Message----- > From: ext Jan Grant [mailto:Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk] > Sent: 23 August, 2002 14:03 > To: Stickler Patrick (NRC/Tampere) > Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg > Subject: RE: Alternative representation of typed literal nodes in > NTriples (and N3) > > > On Fri, 23 Aug 2002 Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com wrote: > > > > On Thu, 22 Aug 2002 Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com wrote: > > > > > > > It also reinforces, IMO, the fact that the typed literal > > > node is a pairing > > > > of a datatype and a literal, the latter having its own > > > three-part structure > > > > of XML bit, string, and language code. > > > > > > I'm not convinced that this is a "fact". > > > > Well, fair enough. > > > > One could also consider literals to be quads, made up > > of datatype, lexical form, XML bit, and lang. > > > > I'm OK with either. > > How are you disposed towards (datatype, stuff) where stuff may or may > not be further structured? If 'stuff' constitutes (or contains) in some explicit fashion a lexical representation which is interpreted in terms of that datatype, sure. Patrick
Received on Friday, 23 August 2002 07:11:48 UTC