W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > April 2011

Re: Comments on this afternoon session on Turtle (ISSUE-12)

From: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 12:13:28 +0100
Cc: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>, Lee Feigenbaum <lee@thefigtrees.net>, antoine.zimmermann@insa-lyon.fr, public-rdf-wg <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <E09BE0AF-A51F-4893-BB05-095496A033F0@garlik.com>
To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
On 2011-04-17, at 12:02, Ivan Herman wrote:
> 
> On Apr 17, 2011, at 12:49 , Richard Cyganiak wrote:
> 
>> On 17 Apr 2011, at 08:45, Ivan Herman wrote:
>>> My understanding is that rdf:plainLiteral is a Datatype (ie, it can be used as part of datatype reasoning in RDF, OWL, or RIF) which is not the case of plain literals,
>> 
>> Yes.
>> 
>>> and its value space[2] are pairs of the form <string,language-tag>
>> 
>> Not quite. According to [2], the value space are all <string,lang-tag> pairs *and* all strings.
>> 
>>> Ie, datatype("chat"@en) would return rdf:PlainLiteral.
>> 
>> This would be consistent with the definition of the datatype. But since the value space of rdf:PlainLiteral also contains all simple strings, the same could be said for returning
>> 
>>  datatype("chat") == rdf:PlainLiteral
> 
> Correct. Would that create huge problems?

Well, rdf:PlainLiteral is not supposed to appear in RDF data, as I understand it. It would also change existing SPARQL queries in a way that users may not expect.

- Steve

-- 
Steve Harris, CTO, Garlik Limited
1-3 Halford Road, Richmond, TW10 6AW, UK
+44 20 8439 8203  http://www.garlik.com/
Registered in England and Wales 535 7233 VAT # 849 0517 11
Registered office: Thames House, Portsmouth Road, Esher, Surrey, KT10 9AD
Received on Sunday, 17 April 2011 11:13:57 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:25:41 GMT