W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > November 1999

Re: Mime types, Literals == Resources

From: Pierre-Antoine CHAMPIN <champin@cpe.fr>
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 09:27:47 +0000
Message-ID: <383A5E13.BC45BAC4@cpe.fr>
To: seth@halcyon.com
CC: RDF Intrest Group <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
> Pierre-Antoine CHAMPIN wrote:
> > where "thisfile.rdf#genid1" whould have "This is a litteral" as CONTENT...
> > which surely would raise some implementation issues left to discuss!

I knew it would :)

Seth Russell wrote:
> But suppose then we want to say something about "this literal" ... would we
> then write:
> <rdf:Description about="This is a litteral">
>    <s:propB> Wanna take a bath</s:propB>
>  </rdf:Description>
> ___OR___
> <rdf:Description about="thisfile.rdf#genid1">
>    <s:propB>Wanna take a bath</s:propB>
>  </rdf:Description>

The rdf:about attribute has to receive an URI,
so only the second proposition looks correct to me.
A problem is :
it makes the assumption that any RDF parser will generate
IDs for anonymous resources in the same way,
which is a strong hypothesis.

But I think Sergey Melnik initiated a thread about ID uniqueness on this list.

Actually, directly expressing statements about anonymous resources
is never easy in RDF. The better way would be to put them in a bag,
and then assert an aboutEach description.

<rdf:Bag ID="anonymousThings">
  <rdf:li> This is a literal </rdf:li>
  <rdf:li parseType="Resource">
    <s:p1> This is an </s:p1>
    <s:p2> anonymous Resource </s:p2>
<rdf:Description aboutEach="#anonymousThings">
  <s:p3> A prop for anonymous resources </s:p3>

Received on Tuesday, 23 November 1999 03:32:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:44:21 UTC