- From: Ora Lassila <daml@lassila.org>
- Date: Mon, 08 Oct 2001 05:02:29 -0400
- To: Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com
- CC: www-rdf-logic@w3.org
Patrick, let's get vocabulary straight: Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com wrote: > Those who prefer weak data typing can just use untyped (or at > best implicitely typed) literal strings, and those who prefer > strong data typing can use e.g. URI encoded typed data values. Just to clarify, when I spoke about weak vs. strong typing, I meant in the traditional programming language sense. That is, weak means that the type information is carried in the data, and strong means that the information is carried by the program. Untyped is sort of off the chart in this respect. In RDF, the schema is the equivalent of a "program", so what you refer to as strong is actually weak. Strong typing in RDF would require access to the schema where the type information is contained. - Ora
Received on Monday, 8 October 2001 05:02:33 UTC