From: "Patrick Stickler" <patrick.stickler@nokia.com> > > I hope that RDF will move toward unicode strings as primitives, and > > langauges as properties. { "chat"en = [lang:en "chat"].} > > This would, of course, require untidy literals, and we just decided > to make literals tidy. > > If languages as properties, in conjuction with literals as subjects, > is truly is a desirable feature in the future, should we rethink tidy > literals? > > If literals remain tidy, then that closes the door on languages > as properties. There must be some other assumption here; because we *can* have tidy literals and { "chat"en = [lang:en "chat"].} and not use literals as subjects just by letting the xml:lang attribute entail the extra Bnode. see mentograph: http://robustai.net/mentography/rdf_lang2.gif Seth RussellReceived on Thursday, 14 March 2002 12:59:34 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 18:22:12 GMT