Re: rdf:text review

I reworded slightly, as I don't want to require to add an own section to 
the spec. I will clarify this during the discussion:

http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/index.php?title=Rdf_text_LC_WG_comment&diff=740&oldid=723

Axel

Seaborne, Andy wrote:
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Axel Polleres [mailto:axel.polleres@deri.org]
>> Sent: 29 April 2009 15:39
>> To: Axel Polleres; Seaborne, Andy
>> Cc: Bijan Parsia; 'RDF Data Access Working Group'
>> Subject: Re: rdf:text review
>>
>> I put the draft comment on the wiki:
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Rdf_text_LC_WG_comment
>>
> 
> I've reworked it to be more suitable as reply. Added:
> 
> 1. Point out the RDF invariant of literals having lang tag or datatype but not both.
> 
> 2. How literals are passed back out of an extension entailment regimes affects the literal accessors of LANG/DATATYPE/STR
> 
> 3. A question about effective boolean values of rdf:text literals.
> 
> 	Andy


-- 
Dr. Axel Polleres
Digital Enterprise Research Institute, National University of Ireland, 
Galway
email: axel.polleres@deri.org  url: http://www.polleres.net/