On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 1:57 PM, Toby Inkster <t...@g5n.co.uk> wrote: > Without knowing the definition of foaf:Person, it's difficult to > conclude that foaf:Person is not a property. However, even without > knowing the definition of a literal, it is easy to conclude that it is > not a suitable node to be used as a property, so in my opinion, it is > sensible to state that triples containing a literal as the predicate > have no meaning (even though I think they should be syntactically > allowed). >
I think it would be perfectly possible to have a datatype mapping to a value-space of properties. But I see no practical benefit with this so I'd prefer not to support literal predicates syntactically. Reto