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

Re: basic question on string literals

From: Lee Feigenbaum <lee@thefigtrees.net>
Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 10:07:17 -0400
Message-ID: <4DD3D295.8090205@thefigtrees.net>
To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
CC: RDF Working Group WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
On 5/18/2011 10:01 AM, Pat Hayes wrote:
> I think the WG needs to take a single, binding decision on the following question, before we can settle the issue about string literals.
>
> Ignoring language tags for the moment, should a plain, untyped string used as a literal in RDF be considered to have the type xsd:string, or the type rdf:PlainLiteral, or some other type, or to not have a type at all?

 From SPARQL's point of view, this question has been answered as 
xsd:string for a while. I'd like this to be RDF's official answer as well.

Lee

>
> Pat
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> IHMC                                     (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973
> 40 South Alcaniz St.           (850)202 4416   office
> Pensacola                            (850)202 4440   fax
> FL 32502                              (850)291 0667   mobile
> phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 18 May 2011 14:07:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:25:42 GMT