W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > September 2001

Re: RDF Core WG work on literals

From: Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org>
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2001 18:04:34 +0100
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010928180215.00abc410@joy.songbird.com>
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
At 12:56 PM 9/28/01 -0400, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
>How does this match up against the pronouncement
>
>         Two RDF strings are deemed to be the same if their ISO/IEC 10646
>         representations match.

Ah, that would appear to be a contradiction.

#g
--

[...]
> > >As an alternative proposal why not simply say that RDF literals are XML
> > >strings, and use the semantics for the XML Schema string datatype?
> >
> > That would ignore the fact that RDF M&S considers language to be part of a
> > literal.
> >
> > http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-rdf-syntax/, section 6:
> > [[[
> > The xml:lang attribute may be used as defined by [XML] to
> > associate a language with the property value. There is no specific data
> > model representation for xml:lang (i.e., it adds no triples to
> > the data model); the language of a literal is considered by RDF to
> > be a part of the literal.
> > ]]]


------------
Graham Klyne
(GK@ACM.ORG)
Received on Friday, 28 September 2001 13:16:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:51 GMT