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

Re: datatype literals and lang codes

From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 10:44:00 +0300
Message-ID: <008a01c278d5$ba4d7200$c99316ac@NOE.Nokia.com>
To: "ext Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hpl.hp.com>, <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>



[Patrick Stickler, Nokia/Finland, (+358 40) 801 9690, patrick.stickler@nokia.com]


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "ext Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
To: <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Sent: 21 October, 2002 10:12
Subject: Re: datatype literals and lang codes


> 
> > Thinking in the bath
> 
> I trust you logged the hot water as a business expense!
> 
> [[
> Does:
> 
>   <a> <b> "chat"<xsd:string>-"en" .
> 
> datatype entail:
> 
>   <a> <b> "chat"<xsd:string>-"fr" .
> ]]
> 
> Answer:
> 
> yes.
> 
> 
> ===
> 
> i.e. under the solution sketched by Graham that appeared to have wide
> support, within a system that uses xsd:string the above entailment holds. At
> the pure RDF level (no datatyping) then it does not hold.

I agree. 

> I understood that it was that subtle distinction that allows Patrick to
> believe that he can both have his cake and eat it.

Yep. Yum.

> I am building on the assumption that that solution is the one we are going
> with; but at the end of the day this is Pat's call I think. From the point
> of the view of the abstract syntax what the solution (big picture) gives me
> is a view in which having the lang codes is coherent - whether I permit any
> of that coherency to be apparant is, of course, another issue.

It's coherent to me. I'm awaiting Pat's comments, though.

Patrick


> Jeremy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
Received on Monday, 21 October 2002 03:44:49 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:52:27 EDT