- From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2002 17:45:24 +0000
- To: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>, Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
- Cc: RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
> >>>Patrick Stickler said:
[...]
> > That said, the M&S view that the language is "part of" the
> > literal is not quite right, and probably should be adjusted
> > (or removed), in that, as with datatyping, language is a
> > property of the occurrence (context) of the literal
> > and not the literal itself.
M&S defines language to be part of the literal. Its simple: a literal is a
pair ("string", "lang").
My question was: does anyone have a compelling reason to change this. Do
you have one Patrick?
> And especially since literals are
> > now tidy,
The pair above is just as tidy as "string".
Brian
Received on Monday, 11 February 2002 12:46:58 UTC