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

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

From: Frank Manola <fmanola@mitre.org>
Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2002 11:08:12 -0500
Message-ID: <3C6BE0EC.2090107@mitre.org>
To: Martyn Horner <martyn.horner@profium.com>
CC: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>, Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, ext Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>, RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
It may be worthwhile in this connection to mention that this issue may 
have wider ramifications.  The current draft W3C Ontology Requirements 
discuss RDF Support for their various design goals (under the 
presumption that RDF is going to be the foundation for Web ontology 
languages.) Under "3.8 Internationalization", they discuss RDF Support 
for internationalization by saying:

"To the extent that XML supports internationalization, so does RDF. The 
RDF Spec states that the xml:lang attribute can be used to support the 
internationalization of labels, but does not accomodate it in the data 
model."

The requirements are at http://km.aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de/owl/

--Frank


Martyn Horner wrote:

> Patrick Stickler wrote:
> 
>>On 2002-02-12 20:28, "ext Frank Manola" <fmanola@mitre.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Patrick says the language is non-existent in the
>>>RDF graph.
>>>
>>Insofar as most examples, representations, DT discussions, etc. I.e. that
>>based on most materials and discussions, it seems to be a rather common
>>view that literals are simple strings. I've yet to see a single example
>>where the literal was represented as a string-language pairing.
>>
>>Clearly, some implementations do treat literals as pairings.
>>
>>It was stated that ARP does this, but if I enter
>>
>>  <dc:title xml:lang="en">World Wide Web Consortium</dc:title>
>>
>>in the W3C RDF validator, I don't see 'en' reflected in either the
>>triples or the graph. Is it then optional functionality not used
>>by the validator? Or is that functionality in a later version of ARP
>>than what is used by the validator?
>>
> 
> Enter it (with suitable preamble) into Profium's online parser at
> http://www.profium.com/gb/products/rdfdemo.shtml and you'll see we take
> the `qualified literal' approach...literal('World Wide Web
> Consortium','en'). It's just another opinion, I guess.
> 
> 
> 


-- 
Frank Manola                   The MITRE Corporation
202 Burlington Road, MS A345   Bedford, MA 01730-1420
mailto:fmanola@mitre.org       voice: 781-271-8147   FAX: 781-271-875
Received on Thursday, 14 February 2002 11:04:36 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:45:11 EDT