W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > October 2002

Re: Notes on updates to RDF Schema

From: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 10:59:39 -0600
Message-Id: <p05111b0db9e7117d981e@[]>
To: "Patrick Stickler" <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org

>[Patrick Stickler, Nokia/Finland, (+358 40) 801 9690, 
>>  >I don't follow that one.  We have been careful not to say whether
>>  >literals are resources or not, but we all know they are really.
>>  Do we? I don't think they are any more. Literal values might or might
>>  not be, but literals???
>The way that RDF says that something is a "resource" is to say
>that it is a member of the class rdfs:Resource.
>If literals are resources, then the RDF normative specs should define
>    rdfs:Literal rdfs:subClassOf rdfs:Resource .
>If the normative specs do not define that, then I will rightly
>conclude that literals are not resources.
>IMO, literals (lexical forms) are not members of rdfs:Resource.

IMO, the question is left open. You are free to decide it one way or 
the other, at your convenience. The MT is careful to be agnostic on 
the issue.

>Datatype values, on the other hand, are.


>  I.e., it should be defined that
>    rdfs:Datatype rdfs:subClassOf rdfs:Resource .
>I.e., that all members of all value spaces of all datatypes are resources.
>If by "literal value" Pat means a datatype value, the thing at the pointy
>end of a L2V mapping, then I think we are in agreement on this.

Right. Maybe we should rename rdfs:Literal to be rdfs:ThingAtPointyEnd.

IHMC					(850)434 8903   home
40 South Alcaniz St.			(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola              			(850)202 4440   fax
FL 32501           				(850)291 0667    cell
phayes@ai.uwf.edu	          http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes
s.pam@ai.uwf.edu   for spam
Received on Thursday, 31 October 2002 11:59:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:24:17 UTC