Re: Literals (Re: model theory for RDF/S)

> It is true that int:5 and int:05 would technically constitute
> different URIs and hence different resources, but that's
> how RDF does things, eh?

No, that's not true. All that Web architecture including RDF says is that
one URI cannot identify two different resources (for some value of
"different"). For example, if you're saying:-

   :x = :y .

Then a DAML aware RDF processor should treat the two as equivalent within
that context!

I'm a great believer in asserting that URIs can identify any resource, and
that creating new identifiable things that aren't resources is an
absurdity... and yet, I don't like this new URI scheme all that much, for
the reasons that Peter has just outlined. RDF can model these things quite
easily, as long as RDF Core do a little shake up of the way in which
literals are interpreted... new URI schemes for this purpose aren't needed
because RDF gives one the power to fight that centralized aspect. In other
words, I am saying that the proposal is detremental to RDF, and it is
detremental to the Semantic Web.

RDF Core are currently investigating what it means to have a literal value,
and I suggest that you await the outcome of that before you take any
drastic action.

Cheers,

--
Kindest Regards,
Sean B. Palmer
@prefix : <http://webns.net/roughterms/> .
:Sean :hasHomepage <http://purl.org/net/sbp/> .

Received on Tuesday, 2 October 2001 08:55:01 UTC