- From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2011 18:32:30 -0400
- To: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
- Cc: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>, RDF Working Group WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
On Sat, 2011-09-10 at 16:40 +0200, Richard Cyganiak wrote: > Sandro, > > The built-in i18n support in RDF is a selling point that sets it apart from just about anything else on the data storage market. I'm not in favour of removing that advantage. I'm suggesting removing it from RDF and putting it in the same place as the understanding that "1"^^xs:int and "1"xs:integer are the same thing. I think both kinds of processing should be part of the standard datatype library that pretty much everyone uses, since RDF is pretty awkward to use without them. > Also: > > On 9 Sep 2011, at 17:19, Sandro Hawke wrote: > > I don't think language tag reasoning should be mandatory > > I think you meant to say “language tag case folding”. It has nothing to do with “reasoning”, in any sense of that word. I called it that because recognizing that "1"^^xs:int and "1"^^xs:integer are the same thing is call "reasoning", and I think there is a strong analogy. Also, I'm not sure case folding is that useful; in any case where you want case folding for language tags, I suspect you should really be using language tag matching, which comes somewhat closer to deserving the term "reasoning". But I'll stick to calling it "processing" in the future. -- Sandro > Best, > Richard
Received on Saturday, 10 September 2011 22:32:41 UTC