You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
One problem with making enums just sets of strings is that when an actual string occurs in the interchange, you don't know which of the enums it is from.
So "down" might be the from the "state of a server" enum, from the "direction of arrow" enum, from the "filling material of pillow" enum etc.
Namespacing the strings helps with that. URIs are one kind of namespacing, which happens to be both well understood and well-supported by RDF.
enums can be anything, it does not have to be an number.
enums in JSON can be a list of strings, list of numbers/integers can even an combination of those (which I do not recommend)
hence this is not the C-style enum where each definition can be regarded as an definition of an integer value, using the definition as the description what it means.
relax numbering requirement as we did for "id" quality
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: