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

Re: basic question on string literals

From: Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 16:11:41 +0200
To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
Cc: RDF Working Group WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20110518141140.GC14697@w3.org>
* Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us> [2011-05-18 09:01-0500]
> 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? 

Compatibility with existing SPARQL leans me towards xsd:string .
SPARQL stakes no claim about literals with a language tag so I'm
inclined to use rdf:PlainLiteral for them.


> 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
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

-- 
-ericP
Received on Wednesday, 18 May 2011 14:12:17 GMT

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