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

Re: Action-48 text: a New Plan for plain literals

From: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 15:05:03 +0100
Cc: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>, Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>, public-rdf-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <CEA35153-277A-4737-A40B-436DB004D6C7@garlik.com>
To: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
On 2011-05-24, at 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]

That's really a separate issue from what the systems store internally. It's close to the abstract, but not necessarily the same. A change from a "lexical form" with either a datatype, or language to a pair/lexical form with a datatype is quite significant.

- Steve

> [1] http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/StringLiterals/LanguageTaggedLiteralDatatypeProposal

-- 
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 Tuesday, 24 May 2011 14:05:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:25:43 GMT