- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2005 11:24:46 -0400
- To: Lars Marius Garshol <larsga@ontopia.net>
- Cc: public-swbp-wg@w3.org
* Lars Marius Garshol <larsga@ontopia.net> [2005-09-15 21:37+0200] > > > * danbri@w3.org > | > | Perhaps if there were a well-known utility class, like > | xyz:NamingProperty, we could use that instead? > > Like Aldo I find that to be a very good suggestion. In fact, since we > cannot use rdfs:label in the expected way, it may well be that the > RDFTM TF will have to create rdftm:NamingProperty. It sounds like > this could be useful outside of just RDF<->TM interoperability, which > is interesting. If we (or anyone) attempts this, let's make sure to get good I18N review; I worry that the current usage of rdfs:label is biased towards languages where markup isn't really needed in labels, and eg Japanese might want Ruby markup in the labels (ie. use XML Literals). But I have only a dim sense of the deeper issues here, to be frank. Dan
Received on Wednesday, 21 September 2005 15:25:04 UTC