W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-wg@w3.org > May 2009

RE: (poll) renaming rdf:text to rdf:plainLiteral

From: Boris Motik <boris.motik@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
Date: Sat, 23 May 2009 11:16:08 +0200
To: "'Sandro Hawke'" <sandro@w3.org>, <public-rif-wg@w3.org>, <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <9AF55E87FF0C4E34B95E9903ED8DBC68@wolf>
I'm supportive of the remaining, and I don't care about the namespace at all: if
foo is the consensus, so be it! I see, however, major coordination problems with
putting it into XSD, so we should not go there.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-owl-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-owl-wg-request@w3.org] On
> Behalf Of Sandro Hawke
> Sent: 23 May 2009 05:33
> To: public-rif-wg@w3.org; public-owl-wg@w3.org
> Subject: (poll) renaming rdf:text to rdf:plainLiteral
> It seems like most of the furor over rdf:text has been caused by some
> misunderstandings about its intended role.  One of the proposals to help
> clarify its role has been to rename it from rdf:text to
> rdf:plainLiteral.  The idea behind this name is to help underscore that
> it is exactly equivalent (mapping 1-1) to "RDF Plain Literals" [1].  It
> is not something else, something new, different, or useful in it's own
> right.  It's just a standard way for systems to handle RDF Plain
> Literals as XML datatype values.  Systems can use it if it makes it
> easier for them, working with RDF data outside of RDF graphs (as in RIF
> and OWL 2).  Within RDF graphs, by definition, there is direct support
> of RDF Plain Literals.
> The original renaming proposal [2] was from Axel, and so far everyone
> who has talked about it on public-rdf-text seems supportive of it.
> Before we (that is, Boris) actually edit(s) that spec to make the name
> change, we wanted to do a quick check to see if anyone has a problem
> with this.  Obviously, we'll also need to make the name change in
> various other documents.  I know it's a bit of a hassle, but try reading
> a day of the rdf-text mailing list; you'll start to see why a change
> like this starts to seem cheap and easy.
> Thoughts?
>      -- Sandro
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-concepts/#dfn-plain-literal
> [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-text/2009AprJun/0148
Received on Saturday, 23 May 2009 09:17:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:42:12 UTC