- From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
- Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 15:47:57 +0200
- To: ext Bill de hÓra <dehora@eircom.net>, RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
On 2002-02-13 15:31, "ext Bill de hÓra" <dehora@eircom.net> wrote: > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Patrick Stickler [mailto:patrick.stickler@nokia.com] >> >> Why not define a URI scheme for RDF literals, and map >> all literals to it, with a placeholder for language. >> >> E.g. lit:en:pan 'pan'/English >> lit:sp:pan 'pan'/Spanish >> lit::pan 'pan' (no language specified) >> >> That solves the tidy literal business also, as all literal >> nodes become URIref nodes and hence are tidy, and there are >> only URIref nodes and bNodes in the graph. No literals in the >> traditional sense. ;-) > > How is this different from the data: URI proposal? In other words, if we > were to do this, why not use an existing scheme? Excellent question. I actually did think to mention the data: URI scheme. If it does the job without any risk of conflict or ambiguity, great. I took the more constrained approach both for the sake of a more focused example as well as for the extra control that a dedicated URI scheme would afford us. Still, if data: does the job, let's use it (presuming we choose such a route). Patrick -- Patrick Stickler Phone: +358 50 483 9453 Senior Research Scientist Fax: +358 7180 35409 Nokia Research Center Email: patrick.stickler@nokia.com
Received on Wednesday, 13 February 2002 08:46:40 UTC