- From: Jan Grant <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 10:00:20 +0100 (BST)
- To: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- cc: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@Baltimore.com>, w3c-rdfcore-wg <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Can't find the original message that this came from, so the
attribution's broken, but...
> >>Option 1: No Change
> >>===================
> >>
> >>xml:lang attributes are considered to be 'part of' a literal.
> >>
> >>This is an issue that has caused some confusion amongst developers
> >>so we would need to write up a clarification of the specifications
> >>to explain more clearly what is going on.
> >>
> >>We would also need to modify n-triple to be able to represent the
> >>languague component of a literal.
> >>
> >>Advantages:
> >>
> >>This is the simplest resolution. It makes significant change to
> >>M&S and existing RDF processors which implemented the spec will
> >>be unaffected. It requires only one triple to represent a
> >>property with a literal value.
> >>
> >>Disadvantages:
> >>
> >>Does not represent language as a triple so requires special
> >>purpose processing to support, for example query.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
this is not a disadvantage (from the POV of query languages) - in my
opinion it means you get to express more clearly what you're looking
for. One can envisage a number of properties of literals that you might
wish to express constraints on in a query language (eg, "< 4") that you
don't necessarily wish to write out with triples; certainly even if you
_did_ write them out, you'd need special processing to deal with them.
--
jan grant, ILRT, University of Bristol. http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/
Tel +44(0)117 9287163 Fax +44 (0)117 9287112 RFC822 jan.grant@bris.ac.uk
On modesty: whoever said "it's hard being perfect" obviously wasn't me.
Received on Tuesday, 24 July 2001 05:13:10 UTC