- From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
- Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2002 20:54:21 +0200
- To: ext Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>, RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
On 2002-02-16 19:58, "ext Dave Beckett" <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk> wrote: > 18: Issue rdfms-literalsubjects > Should the subjects of RDF statements be allowed to > be literals? > > Propose: > > o the WG resolves that the current syntaxes (RDF/XML, > n-triples, graph syntax) do not allow literals as subjects. > > o the WG notes that it is aware of no reason why literals > should not be subjects and a future WG with a less > restrictive charter may extend the syntaxes to allow > literals as the subjects of statements. > > See: > http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-literalsubjects Could my posting http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Feb/0464.html please be added as a "Further Discussion" reference for this issue, if that can be done even after it is agreed to be closed? I did not bring this up during the telecon as I did not feel it should delay approval of the action or that rewording of the resolution was manditory. Nor did I wish to consume further valuable time on it. Still, I would like for there to be some kind of mention somewhere about the tidy/untidy, meaningful/nonmeaningful subjects issue, and I think my use case referenced above is a reasonably specific and precise summary of the issue. Thanks, 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 Saturday, 16 February 2002 13:52:53 UTC