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

Re: Outstanding Issues - rdfms-xmllang

From: John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2002 12:13:34 -0500
Message-ID: <3C7A70BE.3050504@reutershealth.com>
To: Misha.Wolf@reuters.com
CC: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com, w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Misha.Wolf@reuters.com wrote:


> -  I don't think the proposal:
[snipped]
>    is right, as a string without a language tag would not match one
>    with.  A consequence would be that people would be discouraged from
>    language tagging their strings, in case other people haven't tagged
>    *their* strings.


I agree.


> -  The above seems to suggest that degrees of fuzziness are required, at
>    user option, as with regular search engines.


I don't think that's necessary.  How about the following rules:

Literals are equal iff:

1) the strings are equal, and
2a) at least one string does not have a tag, or
2b) one tag is a prefix of the other within the meaning of RFC 3066
     (i.e. "fr"/French is not a prefix of "fry"/Frisian but is a prefix
     of "FR-CA"/Canadian French).

This treats a missing tag as synonymous with the RFC 3066 language range
"*", which matches any tag.

-- 
John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com>     http://www.reutershealth.com
I amar prestar aen, han mathon ne nen,    http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
han mathon ne chae, a han noston ne 'wilith.  --Galadriel, _LOTR:FOTR_
Received on Monday, 25 February 2002 12:17:48 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:45:20 EDT