W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > April to June 2011

Re: RDF WG Resolution Regarding Various Forms of String Literals

From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 13:37:42 +0100
Message-ID: <4DFF3F16.4040300@epimorphics.com>
To: David Wood <david@3roundstones.com>
CC: Lee Feigenbaum <lee@thefigtrees.net>, public-rdf-dawg@w3.org


On 15/06/11 17:39, David Wood wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> The RDF working group resolved our ISSUE-12 [1] today, which is intended to "reconcile various forms of string literals".
>
> We resolved to accept the proposal at:
>    http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/StringLiterals/AbolishUntaggedPlain
> with the modification that preferred output form (SHOULD) is "foo" not "foo"^^xsd:string in RDF; and we recommend that SPARQL and other WGs do the same.
>
> Discussion highlighted several possible areas of concern, which we believe the current proposal addresses.  Specifically, it was noted that:
>
> - The forms "foo" and "foo"^^xsd:string are equivalent input syntaxes.
> - The form "foo" is the preferred output syntax.
> - The WG suggests retaining the term "plain literal" in documents to avoid unnecessary rework.  Such plain literals would be considered semantically equivalent to xsd:strings.

This would be good but it is not mentioned in the resolution by RDF-WG.

SPARQL 1.0 uses "simple literals" for plain literals with language tag.

They are used also for the lexical form of a literals itself and for the 
text of language tags.

	Andy

>
> NB: This resolution makes *no statement* about language-tagged literals (e.g. "foo"@en).
>
> We invite discussion regarding the ramifications of this resolution to other working groups and implementors.
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/12
>
>
>
Received on Monday, 20 June 2011 12:38:18 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:46 GMT