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

State of language-tagged literals.

From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
Date: Tue, 09 Aug 2011 16:26:51 +0100
Message-ID: <4E4151BB.6010409@epimorphics.com>
To: RDF-WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
In the last TC, David asked for a summary of the language tagged 
literals issue (ISSUE-71).

Richard's proposal is [1] which introduces classes rdf:LangString and 

We can then write rdfs:range statements about literals.

rdf:Text = xsd:string union rdf:LangString

xsd:string and rdf:LangString are disjoint.

The value of language-tagged literals
is a pair <Unicode string, language tag>.

The technical term “language-tagged string” is used for rdf:LangString 

In addition, I am suggesting giving a single datatype to language-tagged 

* All literals have a datatype.

* Some literals represent languages-specific strings;
   they have a string and a language tag.

* Literals that represent non-language-specific values.
   they do not have a language tag
   they have a lexical form.

One of Richards concerns was how this all works into documents, 
particularly around the names for concepts as, at the moment, 
language-tagged strings have to handled specially in text.

I'm suggesting there are:

+ literals
+ language-tagged string

just like

+ literals
+ numeric literals

rdf:PlainLiteral remains a datatype - it's usefulness is giving a 
lexical form to language-tagged strings, and also by forming a datatype 
that covers the class rdf:Text.  The fact that the value space overlaps 
with rdf:LangString and xsd:string is unimportant.


[1] Richards proposal:

[2] owl:Real --
Received on Tuesday, 9 August 2011 15:27:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:02:00 UTC