W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-text@w3.org > October to December 2008

RE: One more minor thing before going to 1st WD from my side...

From: Phillips, Addison <addison@amazon.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2008 10:46:53 -0800
To: Jie Bao <baojie@cs.rpi.edu>, Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
CC: "public-rdf-text@w3.org" <public-rdf-text@w3.org>
Message-ID: <4D25F22093241741BC1D0EEBC2DBB1DA017C355613@EX-SEA5-D.ant.amazon.com>
> I agree. I also suggest change 4.2 to "Comparison function of
> rdf:text Values".

I don't think that's grammatical English and would suggest you leave it as is.

Separately, I note that 4.3.2, which defines 'fn:matches-language-range' says:

Summary: returns true if the language tag part of $input is a valid language tag according to BCP-47 [BCP-47], and if it matches the language-range expression supplied as $range as specified by the algorithm for "Matching of Language Tags" which is part of BCP-47 [BCP-47]; otherwise, it returns false.

It needs to say *which* matching algorithm in BCP47, since there are three! I suggest you say the "basic filtering" algorithm (since you define $range as 'language-range' and not as 'extended-language-range'). This is probably the right choice for rdf:text, although it precluded doing matching using specific subtags (i.e. you can't ask for "all text that has a 'script' of 'Latn'" by using the range "*-Latn").



Addison Phillips
Globalization Architect -- Lab126
Chair -- W3C Internationalization WG
Editor -- RFC 4646, 4647

Internationalization is not a feature.
It is an architecture.

Received on Wednesday, 10 December 2008 18:47:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:53:42 UTC