- From: Gregg Kellogg <gregg@kellogg-assoc.com>
- Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 17:34:20 -0400
- To: Martin Hepp <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>
- CC: Gavin Carothers <gavin@topquadrant.com>, "public-html-data-tf@w3.org" <public-html-data-tf@w3.org>
Language tagged literals are supported, but for some reason not on meta. See "property values" in my spec. Gregg Kellogg Sent from my iPhone On Oct 18, 2011, at 2:24 PM, "Martin Hepp" <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org> wrote: > Hi Gavin, > thanks for raising this. But as far as I can see, this issue is "still pending review" and anyway just considered for RDF 1.1, so current SPARQL implementations will still break on this. > > Anyway, in this respect I think it is important to find a way to indicate the language of the value for a "content" attribute in > > <meta content="xyz"> > > patterns in Microdata; I just found out that the language of the context will not be used by Microdata-to-RDF parsers. > > Martin > > On Oct 18, 2011, at 11:09 PM, Gavin Carothers wrote: > >> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 1:50 PM, Martin Hepp >> <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org> wrote: >>> Ah! Thanks! That is a bug in my RDFa example. In all GoodRelations examples, we use datatyping, except for xsd:string, because while this is theoretically needed, too, the distinction between plain literals and typed RDF literals with xsd:string as their type is hard to explain to practitioners. >> >> The RDF WG has resolved to remove that distinction. "example" == >> "example"^^xsd:string the current working draft of RDF Concepts talks >> more about this, >> http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-concepts/#section-Graph-Literal >> >> Cheers, >> Gavin >
Received on Tuesday, 18 October 2011 21:34:59 UTC