Re: status of rdf:langString

On 02/27/2013 02:06 AM, Antoine Zimmermann wrote:
> Le 26/02/2013 21:08, Peter Patel-Schneider a écrit :
>> Is rdf:langString a datatype?  It sure looks as if it should be, but it
>> isn't.
>
> It is.

There is lots of wording strongly suggesting otherwise.
>
>>
>> The OWL WG finessed this issue a different way, that was consistent with
>> datatypes.  This could be done here as well (the datatype rdf:langString
>> takes strings of the form "xxx@ll", ...), but maybe my proposed fix for
>> the Semantics could be made visible in Concepts.
>
> We have debated this extensively and we reach an agreement. What you propose 
> was proposed then, was rejected then (personally, I was in favour of it).

I'm not arguing (any more) for this solution, just a resolution on the status 
of rdf:langString that is carried through in the documents.  I suppose that it 
could be an instance of rdfs:Datatype without being a datatype, but that seems 
a bit strange (although not semantically ill-formed).
>
> AZ
>
>
peter