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

Re: I18N Issue alternative: a passing thought.

From: pat hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 12:24:07 -0500
Message-Id: <p06001f05bb8f98a41933@[]>
To: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org

>It does offer a few benefits. Two significant
>changes are that it would
>require equality of values, even plain literals, to
>be defined by rule, rather than node equality
>in the graph syntax.

? No, I don't think so. That is, each node will denote a single 
value. Of course two different nodes could denote the same value, but 
then that is already the case and has always been.  Even in our 
present design, there is nothing to stop a bnode denoting the same 
thing as a literal.

>It would also make literal values untidy

The bnodes (or URIs ) are just as tidy as the rest of the graph. What 
it does do is mean that there might not be a 1:1 mapping from the 
bnodes denoting the values to the (plain) literals indicating them: 
but we know that is inevitable if we have things like decimal and 
octal.  As for "chat"@en versus "chat"@fr, seems to me to be an 
advantage to be able to not say what the lang is if you happen to not 
know, but to have a standard way to say it if you do know, and to be 
able to add the fact when you find out.

>and permit
>long range typing via rdfs:range.

Permit, yes. But lets not go there.


IHMC	(850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973   home
40 South Alcaniz St.	(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola			(850)202 4440   fax
FL 32501			(850)291 0667    cell
phayes@ihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
Received on Thursday, 18 September 2003 13:27:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:54:08 UTC