- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 14:21:29 -0400 (EDT)
- To: jjc@hpl.hp.com
- Cc: public-owl-wg@w3.org
From: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com> Subject: Re: lang tag stuff ISSUE-71 Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 13:59:03 -0400 (EDT) [...] > Yes, this sort of thing is more palatable. I suggest having a lang > "facet" and then using the syntax for datatype restrictions. > > > Jeremy > > peter Suggestion: New datatype owl:plainLiteral (should really be rdfs:plainLiteral but we can't do that) to be RDF plain literals. New datatype facet (allowable only for owl:plainLiteral), lang, which is a pattern matching against the lang bit of a plain literal, just as pattern matches against string values. Plain literals without language tags would not match any lang pattern. peter
Received on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 18:25:37 UTC