- From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
- Date: Sat, 11 Jun 2011 13:55:01 -0400
- To: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
- Cc: Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>, Michael Hausenblas <michael.hausenblas@deri.org>
On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 12:55 PM, Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de> wrote: > That's a good point. The problem is that xsd:string is too narrow and rdfs:Literal is too broad. RDF 1.1 is likely to define a class of all string literals (tagged and untagged), we'll use that when its name has been settled, and perhaps just leave the inaccurate xsd:string in place for now. There already exists such a type that is a W3C recommendation. It is called rdf:PlainLiteral - see http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-plain-literal/ I'm not sure why RDF 1.1 working group is not aware of that. -Alan
Received on Saturday, 11 June 2011 17:55:58 UTC