- From: Karsten Tolle <Storr@t-online.de>
- Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 10:16:14 +0100
- To: www-rdf-comments@w3.org
- Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org, christop@ics.forth.gr
Hi, in the RDF Schema (http://www.w3.org/TR/PR-rdf-schema/) I found rdfs:Literal in Figure 1 and Figure 2 just as an rdfs:Resource. In the 'Basic XML Serialization' rdfs:Literal is a class (type = rdfs:Class) and in the 'Compact XML Serialization' rdfs:Literal is a class and additional is defined as a sub class of rdfs:Resource. So, the question what is rdfs:Literal. It represents the set of atomic values, e.g. textual strings and so on. Classes representing sets, so, I think it is right to say that rdfs:Literal is a class, especially because rdfs:Literal is used for the rdfs:range definitions of rdfs:comment and rdfs:label and the range of rdfs:range is rdfs:Class. If rdfs:Literal is a sub class of rdfs:Resource this would mean that the instances of rdfs:Literal are also instances of rdfs:Resource, but a textual string has no URI and is no resource. Therefore I prefer the version of the 'Basic XML Serialization' that says rdfs:Literal is a class but not a sub class of rdfs:Resource. Greetings, Karsten
Received on Monday, 6 December 1999 04:16:36 UTC