URIs for literals (was RE: referendum on httpRange-14 (was RE: "information resource")

Well, if you want/need the literal to be lexically embedded within
the URI, then a data: URI would work for plain literals; but I don't
think it would do for literals with lang tags or typed literals.

And for that matter, if all you need is a URI to denote a literal, 
you could much more easily just say something such as

  uuid:1fbbffba-a316-41e7-b9ac-b98b95b43667
      owl:sameAs
         "somelexicalform"^^some:datatype .

If you want a fully bidirectional mapping between URI and 
RDF literal such that one can infer either from the other,
then probably a custom URI scheme would be needed.

Patrick


> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-tag-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:www-tag-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of
> ext Chris Lilley
> Sent: 29 October, 2004 18:54
> To: Stuart Williams
> Cc: Joshua Allen; Graham Klyne; Tim Berners-Lee; www-tag@w3.org
> Subject: Re: referendum on httpRange-14 (was RE: "information 
> resource")
> 
> 
> 
> On Friday, October 29, 2004, 11:23:30 AM, Stuart wrote:
> 
> 
> SW> Joshua Allen wrote:
> 
> >>Can't people just mint a URI to stand in for a literal, if 
> they want to
> >>assert about that literal?
> 
> 
> SW>     data:text/plain,some%20percent%20escaped%20literal%20value
> 
> SW> Seems a bit ugly... and has probably been suggested before.
> 
> 
> With the proviso that I would prefer
> 
> data:text/plain;charset="utf-8",some%20percent%20escaped%20lit
> eral%20value
> 
> It seems a perfectly fine way to define a literal. Its also a URI, its
> moderately compact, the network performance is very good :) it has a
> defined media type, its clear exactly what the representation is, its
> clear that its always available and does not vary by media type,
> referer, time of day, etc.
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
>  Chris Lilley                    mailto:chris@w3.org
>  Chair, W3C SVG Working Group
>  Member, W3C Technical Architecture Group
> 
> 
>

Received on Friday, 29 October 2004 17:11:44 UTC