W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-comments@w3.org > January to March 2003

RE: language tags in typed RDF literals

From: <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 12:49:11 +0200
Message-ID: <A03E60B17132A84F9B4BB5EEDE57957B01B90B7E@trebe006.europe.nokia.com>
To: <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>, <www-rdf-comments@w3.org>
Cc: <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>



> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Brian McBride [mailto:bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com]
> Sent: 18 February, 2003 12:40
> To: Stickler Patrick (NMP/Tampere); phayes@ai.uwf.edu;
> www-rdf-comments@w3.org
> Cc: Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk
> Subject: RE: language tags in typed RDF literals
> 
> 
> At 10:50 18/02/2003 +0200, Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com wrote:
> 
> 
> > >    ... seemed at the time to be important to Patrick
> > > who stated that
> > > Nokia felt strongly about the issue.
> > >
> > >    - later Patrick reported that after further thought, that
> > > whilst Nokia
> > > still preferred the lang tag to be allowed in a datatyped
> > > literal, they
> > > could live without it.
> > >
> > > ...
> > >
> > > >(1) lang tags be forbidden by the RDF syntax from appearing
> > > in non-XML
> > > >typed literals.
> >
> >This option is preferred.
> 
> Hi Patrick,
> 
> Can I check what you are saying here.
> 
> Are you saying, of the two options, this is the one you would 
>  prefer, or 
> are you advocating removing lang tags from the abstract 
> syntax for non-XML 
> typed literals.

I'm saying, if we have to choose between making the lang tag
part of the datatyping interpretation or removing them, then
remove them.

I.e. it would be nice if they stayed, but not at the expense
of "corrupting" the datatyping semantics.

Better a little bit of pain now than alot later, for a long time...

Patrick
Received on Tuesday, 18 February 2003 05:49:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 21 September 2012 14:16:31 GMT