- From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
- Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 14:17:11 +0100
- To: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
On 24/05/11 13:21, Richard Cyganiak wrote: > On 24 May 2011, at 13:10, Steve Harris wrote: >> I agree with Andy, this is not going to play well with existing systems, unless rdf:LanguageTaggedString exists purely in the abstract syntax, you can still end up with literals with both a datatype, and a language tag. > > It *does* purely exist in the abstract syntax, as I said in my mail but you snipped it: > > “7. In concrete syntaxes, the "foo"@en form MUST be used for rdf:LanguageTaggedStrings.” [1] Concepts ==> """ The RDF abstract syntax is a set of triples, called the RDF graph. """ To date, the result of parsing in all toolkits I'm aware of is that the output is RDF abstract syntax, or though of as such. It's the internal representation change that affects systems, not the concrete serialization. Andy > > Best, > Richard > > > [1] http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/StringLiterals/LanguageTaggedLiteralDatatypeProposal
Received on Tuesday, 24 May 2011 13:17:41 UTC