W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > February 2002

Re: xml:lang [was Re: Outstanding Issues ]

From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 17:42:12 +0200
To: ext Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
CC: RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <B88F0474.E136%patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
On 2002-02-12 13:31, "ext Brian McBride" <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com> wrote:

> At 12:00 12/02/2002 +0200, Patrick Stickler wrote:
>> On 2002-02-12 11:48, "ext Brian McBride" <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com> wrote:
> 
> [...]
> 
>> the RDF graph.
>> 
>> If literals are pairings of string and language, then let's
>> represent them that way everywhere.
> 
> 
> Just so.
> 
> Brian

In keeping with my reputation for crazy, odd, bizarre
and annoying suggestions...  ;-)

Why not define a URI scheme for RDF literals, and map
all literals to it, with a placeholder for language.

E.g.   lit:en:pan       'pan'/English
       lit:sp:pan       'pan'/Spanish
       lit::pan         'pan' (no language specified)

That solves the tidy literal business also, as all literal
nodes become URIref nodes and hence are tidy, and there
are only URIref nodes and bNodes in the graph. No literals
in the traditional sense. ;-)

After all, if literals have structure, and we have to
adopt a structured representation, why not a URI?

OK, crawling back under my rock...

Patrick
 

--
               
Patrick Stickler              Phone: +358 50 483 9453
Senior Research Scientist     Fax:   +358 7180 35409
Nokia Research Center         Email: patrick.stickler@nokia.com
Received on Tuesday, 12 February 2002 12:21:48 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:45:09 EDT