W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdfa-wg@w3.org > June 2011

Re: Should RDFa 1.1 xsd:strings be coerced to plain literals?

From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 14:13:17 -0500
Message-ID: <4E0B794D.70204@aptest.com>
To: public-rdfa-wg@w3.org
Too lazy to check right now, but can a plain literal have a language?  
If not, then I say -1.  Otherwise +1

On 6/29/2011 2:09 PM, Gregg Kellogg wrote:
> On Jun 29, 2011, at 10:50 AM, Manu Sporny wrote:
>
>> RDF WG has just issued a decision on the long-standing xsd:string vs.
>> plain literal debate:
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/blog/SW/2011/06/29/reconciling_various_forms_of_string_lite
>>
>> Should we update RDFa 1.1 Core Processing Sequence to ensure that
>> anything typed as "xsd:string" generates a plain literal?
>
> +1
>
>> -- manu
>>
>> -- 
>> Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny)
>> President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
>> blog: PaySwarm Developer Tools and Demo Released
>> http://digitalbazaar.com/2011/05/05/payswarm-sandbox/
>>
>
> Gregg

-- 
Shane McCarron
Managing Director, Applied Testing and Technology, Inc.
+1 763 786 8160 x120
Received on Wednesday, 29 June 2011 19:13:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:19:52 UTC