lang tags on literals

• From: Vladimir Alexiev <vladimir.alexiev@ontotext.com>
• Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2015 11:20:51 +0300
• To: <public-annotation@w3.org>
• Message-ID: <08a801d0eec6$44d269c0$ce773d40$@ontotext.com>

http://www.w3.org/TR/annotation-model/#simple-textual-body and
http://www.w3.org/TR/annotation-model/#embedded-textual-body
don't avail themselves of the opportunity to use lang tags on the text
literal, and instead use dc:language.

Using dc:language is a good practice, especially for resources that are not
a simple text string.
But I think that for strings, the language should be repeated as a lang tag
for consistency & completeness.
(This approach is adopted by Getty LOD, e.g. see
http://vocab.getty.edu/doc/#Language_Dual_URLs) 

So for http://www.w3.org/TR/annotation-model/#embedded-textual-body I
propose:
- after the phrase "additional properties such as dc:format and dc:language
should be given if known"
- add this sentence: "If the language is known, it should also be provided
as a language tag on the string literal"
- and add lang tag in the example:
   rdf:value "content"@en ;

For http://www.w3.org/TR/annotation-model/#simple-textual-body, I would
allow it to be used with a lang tag,
which will extend this economical representation also for this case, but I
don't feel strongly about it.

Cheers!

Received on Monday, 14 September 2015 08:21:16 UTC