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

Re: Case of language identifiers

From: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 12:19:16 +0100
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021023121744.00a9e5d0@127.0.0.1>
To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org

FWIW, my preference is 2.  I think it will be most natural for the bulk of 
our intended audience.  It's also minimum change.  But I don't feel very 
strongly.

#g
--

At 11:27 AM 10/23/02 +0200, Jeremy Carroll wrote:
>The question that comes to mind is when do we do the case normalization on 
>the
>language tag.
>Just to be inconvenient, the convention for language tags is that the first
>component is lower case, the second upper case: e.g. en-US
>
>Possible answers are:
>
>1: ASAP, during parsing, the abstact syntax is in terms of lower case
>identifiers.
>
>2: In the equality function in the abstract syntax, before datatyping and the
>model theory.
>This is the current position. It has the defect that datatyping and the model
>theory should then be expressed as operations over equivalence classes, in
>some way or other.
>
>3: During the datatype mapping for String and XML Literals
>The abstract syntax is then defined in terms of any case identifiers.
>But the case is normalized before we get to a value.
>This is subtly different in that for unknown datatypes we don't know that 
>they
>are insensitive to the case of the language identifier.
>i.e. <a:datatype>"foo"-en and <a:datatype>"foo"-EN
>might be different; it is just that that are the same for all the ones we 
>talk
>about.
>
>
>My preference is 1 which would be a change from what we have previously
>agreed.
>
>Jeremy

-------------------
Graham Klyne
<GK@NineByNine.org>
Received on Wednesday, 23 October 2002 06:53:24 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:52:29 EDT