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

Re: resend: Fwd: I18N Comments]

From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2003 14:35:03 +0300
Message-ID: <008e01c34c57$7c34d9d0$020ca20a@NOE.Nokia.com>
To: "ext Brian McBride" <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, "Graham Klyne" <gk@ninebynine.org>
Cc: "rdf core" <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>, "i18n" <w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org>, "Martin Duerst" <duerst@w3.org>


----- Original Message -----
From: "ext Brian McBride" <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
To: "Graham Klyne" <gk@ninebynine.org>
Cc: "rdf core" <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>; "i18n" <w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org>; "Martin
Duerst" <duerst@w3.org>
Sent: 17 July, 2003 13:58
Subject: Re: resend: Fwd: I18N Comments]


>
> On Tue, 2003-07-15 at 16:48, Graham Klyne wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> >
> > My impression is that no showstopper has been identified, but the
current
> > approach will be quite painful for some.
>
> Have we identified whom?

I think those who want to qualify mixed content
with language tags and maintain a distinction
from plain literals. I.e. those who want to say

   xml"..."@en

or

   "..."@en^^rdfs:XMLLiteral

neither of which are supported by RDF directly.

Of course, that's simply qualified that blank node
more precisely, without actually clarifying its
denotation ;-)

Patrick
Received on Thursday, 17 July 2003 07:35:17 EDT

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