W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > July 2003

Re: Related comment from XML Schema

From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2003 10:47:12 +0300
Message-ID: <003101c34aa5$51f1b480$100da20a@NOE.Nokia.com>
To: <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>, "ext Martin Duerst" <duerst@w3.org>
Cc: <w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org>, <msm@w3.org>


----- Original Message -----
From: "ext Martin Duerst" <duerst@w3.org>
To: "Patrick Stickler" <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>; <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Cc: <w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org>; <msm@w3.org>
Sent: 15 July, 2003 00:43
Subject: Re: Related comment from XML Schema


> Hello Patrick,
>
> At 13:03 03/07/11 +0300, Patrick Stickler wrote:
>
> >Several members of the WG have tried to make the following
> >point clear to you, yet you seem to keep missing it, insofar
> >as your posts suggest, at least to me.
> >
> >The RDF Core WG has not "removed language information
> >from XML literals", as if we don't care about the
> >ability to associate language with XML encoded content,
>
> Could you then please explain to me where the language
> information goes if the XML literal is something like
> "Hello <strong>World</strong>!" ? Where in the graph
> (the G-view) is it, or, where in the graph would I put it?

Sorry, I misunderstood, and thereby misstated.

Yes, the WG did remove the semantic relation between a
rdf:XMLLiteral typed literal and an enclosing language scope.

The motivation for that was that the special treatment of
rdf:XMLLiteral was causing havoc of various sorts in
the MT, and having no lang tag was not viewed as a
serious technical loss, since XML provides the means
to express that language information in the literal itself
(accepting the special challenges of mixed content).

Patrick
Received on Tuesday, 15 July 2003 03:47:25 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:58:45 EDT