- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2001 05:35:12 -0500 (EST)
- To: <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>
- cc: <Ian.Stuart@ed.ac.uk>, <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
yes, I thought I'd remembered to mention that rdf:value could be an appropriate replacement for my:content. Fair point! Dan On Fri, 2 Nov 2001 Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com wrote: > > > <my:field > > my:name = "issn" > > my:content="0001-3072" /> > > Dan, Ian, > > This does, of course, result in a a subgraph > that perhaps is workable, but only to applications > which understand the 'my:content' semantics. > > Such a treatment precludes the use of generic > tools which may be looking for either unqualified > literal property values, or qualified values > where the value content is defined via the > generic rdf:value property. > > Perhaps the following would be a bit more "generic": > > <my:field my:name="issn" rdf:value="0001-3072"/> > > This provides the 'my:name' specific qualification while > keeping the actual content organized according to > generic RDF constructs and semantics, which might > be a bit more flexible over the long run. > > Eh? > > Cheers, > > 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 Friday, 2 November 2001 05:35:18 UTC