- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 15:17:23 +0200
- To: "pat hayes" <phayes@ihmc.us>, <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
> Greetings. > > Y'all are going to just LOVE me for this, Lot's and lots. (While I personally like that design - it is the wrong time for this proposal). Hence I will pick holes: > aaa ppp "sss"@ttt . > -->> > aaa ppp _:x . > _:x xsd:string "sss" . > _:x rdf:langTag "ttt" . > > Note that xsd:string is the appropriate datatype for simple literals, > providing a way to in effect put a simple literal string in the > subject position (encoded as a bnode). In fact, in this design, > xsd:string is in effect owl:sameAs applied to literals. No that last bit is incorrect - the blank node _:x has language ttt whereas the string sss does not. The additional blank node was at the heart of the untidy proposals (either explicitly or implicitly) and this proposal is essentially untidiness revisited. Jeremy
Received on Thursday, 18 September 2003 09:36:59 UTC