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

Re: Proposal to postpone tex-02

From: Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org>
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 10:58:40 +0000
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20030328105319.00b87320@127.0.0.1>
To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org

I would argue to reject rather than postpone this issue, for reasons set 
out in my response [1].  (I could be persuaded otherwise if real value can 
be argued for a higher-level matching rule in RDF, but I've not yet seen 
any such compelling argument.)

I note that rejecting this issue doesn't mean that a future working group 
can't pick it up again.  It would indicate that the present working group 
doesn't feel that further consideration is required.

#g
--

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0480.html


At 11:36 27/03/2003 +0100, Jeremy Carroll wrote:


>Issue was raised in this fashion ...
>
>Tex-02:
>[[
>2) With respect to the rules for comparing literals:
>http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-concepts/#section-Literal-Equality
>
>For reasons of standardization and ease of use, there should exist a higher
>level matching rule that allows one to search for (lang="en", str) and to
>get
>matches to more detailed tags (lang="en-gb", str).
>This higher level rule should be defined to
>insure a standard practice. I assume this is, or will be, defined somewhere
>else in RDF. Presumably this rule will also provide for inclusion of strings
>with no attribute as well, so I can search for a string and find all matches
>with relevant sets of lang attributes.
>
>To repeat the earlier point, the comparison rule should also be made case
>insensitive for language identifiers.
>]]
>
>
>Proposed response:
>[[
>We have added this to the postponed issues list.
>We have also asked the co-ordination group to note that better support for
>langauge related operations is needed.
>
>A sketch solution, that is outside our current charter to consider in
>detail, is as follows:
>
>For each language tag define two clases:
>For example for language tag en-US define
>
><rdfs:Class rdf:about=
>   "http://www.w3.org/example/lang#en-US" >
>   <rdfs:comment>The class of all plain literals and XMLLiterals with
>language tag en-US</rdfs:comment>
></rdfs:Class>
><rdfs:Class rdf:about=
>   "http://www.w3.org/example/lang2#en-US" >
>   <rdfs:comment>The class of all plain literals and XMLLiterals with
>language tag which has
>                 en-US as a prefix</rdfs:comment>
></rdfs:Class>
>
>Then a combination of rdf range constraints, and various OWL constructs, can
>be used to query/search/describe language tagged literals within the
>semantic web.
>
>?? Some of the RDF Core WG would be willing to work with I18N IG members to
>pursue this.
>?? Not in charter for us to do so.
>]]
>
>Note for discussion,
>we currently have no way of describing the class of plain literals within
>RDFS; this feels like a related defect.
>
>Jeremy

-------------------
Graham Klyne
<GK@NineByNine.org>
PGP: 0FAA 69FF C083 000B A2E9  A131 01B9 1C7A DBCA CB5E
Received on Friday, 28 March 2003 07:10:34 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:56:15 EDT