- From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
- Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 17:30:02 +0100
- To: Dave Reynolds <dave.e.reynolds@gmail.com>
- Cc: Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>, Public GLD WG <public-gld-wg@w3.org>, Makx Dekkers <makx@makxdekkers.com>
On 26 Oct 2012, at 16:43, Dave Reynolds wrote: > #2 Can an instance of xsd:language be an instance of dcterms:LinguisticSystem? > > The problem here is that XML Schema datatypes defines xsd:language as a subtype of xsd:string and RDF defines strings as denoting themselves. Both specs agree that an xsd:language denotes the *name* of the language, a string with valid spelling to meet RFC 3066. Ah, I was assuming that the values of xsd:language would be what's *identified* by the language tags that are in the lexical space, so the values would essentially be the languages. That's not what the XSD spec says. > Whereas the intent of Dublin Core seems to be that an instance of dct:LinguisticSystem denotes the Lingustic System itself not the name of it. > > So at this level the semantics do not appear match. Strictly speaking you are right. This seems to be a bit of an angels-and-pinheads reason to reject this extremely convenient modelling approach though. We can always use the old dc: namespace… Best, Richard > > Dave > > > On 26/10/12 15:49, Phil Archer wrote: >> I'm struggling to see how this is not inconsistent. The HTML doc says >> that dcterms:language as a range of >> http://purl.org/dc/terms/LinguisticSystem which is a class. >> >> The schema says the same thing: >> http://dublincore.org/2012/06/14/dcterms.ttl (that takes some finding!) >> >> IIRC this is something I've heard you say before that several others >> disagree with (I defer to others and make no assertion myself), that a >> literal is a resource and therefore you can always give a literal as the >> value even when a URI is expected (DC doesn't use the terms object >> property and datatype property but that's what we're talking about). >> >> I note though that dcterms:language is a sub property of dc:language >> (which has no domain and range), so is that a get out of gaol card? >> >> Phil. >> >> On 26/10/2012 15:19, Richard Cyganiak wrote: >>> Phil, >>> >>> On 26 Oct 2012, at 15:04, Phil Archer wrote: >>>> That's a datatyped string, not a class. That's data, not an object. >>>> That's inconsistent. We know. >>> >>> As I already said in the call, it's *not* inconsistent with anything >>> that is formally or informally said in the DC documentation. >>> >>> It may not be the intent of the DC group. >>> >>> Best, >>> Richard >>> >> > >
Received on Friday, 26 October 2012 16:30:36 UTC