- From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
- Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2011 13:21:22 +0100
- To: Hugh Glaser <hg@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Cc: Mischa Tuffield <mmt04r@ecs.soton.ac.uk>, "<nathan@webr3.org>" <nathan@webr3.org>, Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>
(catching up) On 2 Apr 2011, at 19:54, Hugh Glaser wrote: >> 1. xsd:string in RDF must die. It's one of those completely and utterly useless pieces of rubbish that litter the RDF specs. > > Perhaps you could tell us what you really think :-) >> > >> 2. If you publish in multiple languages, then perhaps it's a good idea to include a plain literal in a “default language” without a language tag, to make SPARQLing easy. > > So I would guess from this that it could be that some documents could be adjusted to recommend this sort of thing. > Certainly for 2; is it the case for 1 that technically there should be a type? The first issue is on the agenda of the new RDF WG: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/12 With the second issue it's not so clear what to do about it. It's a question of good practice, and I'm not aware of any document where that recommendation could be easily added. Best, Richard
Received on Friday, 8 April 2011 12:23:20 UTC