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

Re: Another week, another ISSUE-12 proposal

From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
Date: Mon, 30 May 2011 19:34:56 +0100
Cc: RDF Working Group WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <06AABEA0-F884-40DA-BEA0-E25A44C5200E@cyganiak.de>
To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>

On 30 May 2011, at 17:25, Pat Hayes wrote:
>> 2. "foo" and corresponding forms in other concrete syntaxes are syntactic sugar for "foo"^^xsd:string. In general, both forms MAY be used and are equivalent.
> 
> "Equivalent" has multiple meanings. In one of them, these forms are equivalent in RDF now. Better say, "represent identical literals in the abstract syntax" or some such phrasing. 

Good point, thanks. I updated the proposal accordingly:
http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/StringLiterals/AbolishUntaggedPlain

Richard
Received on Monday, 30 May 2011 18:35:24 GMT

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