OWL Internationalized string - update

I made a few changes to the problem collecting page [1], reflecting recent
email correspondence and the last task force meeting on Monday. The initial
spec page [2] is not yet changed as there are several pending issues. Please
comment if I miss something

[1] http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/InternationalizedString
[2] http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/InternationalizedStringSpec

Jie

On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 2:13 PM, Phillips, Addison <addison@amazon.com>wrote:

> +1 to the list.
>
> I assumed (and it seems, correctly [1]) that RDF just used xml:lang to
> serialize "rdf:text". Which kind of gives me pause here.
>
> The problem is that xml:lang is metadata within an XML document. It can be
> applied to elements other than "text" (although the meaning with non-string
> datatypes is, at best, difficult to discern). Have you considered just
> making it a general purpose facet or set of facets? That might be more in
> keeping with the design of RDF in general. Using it with (say) an integer is
> kind of silly (but then, so would 'fractionDigits' or possibly
> 'maxLength')...
>
> Addison
>
> [1]
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-syntax-grammar-20040210/#section-Syntax-languages
>
> Addison Phillips
> Globalization Architect -- Lab126
>
> Internationalization is not a feature.
> It is an architecture.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Sandro Hawke [mailto:sandro@w3.org]
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 3:55 AM
> > To: Chris Welty
> > Cc: Axel Polleres; Phillips, Addison; Ivan Herman; Felix Sasaki;
> > Jie Bao; Ian Horrocks; Alan Wu; www-archive@w3.org
> > Subject: mailing list for rdf:text, namespace use
> >
> >
> > > All,
> > >
> > > I don't think there is a need to continue cc'ing the comments
> > lists
> > > for all the WGs on this thread.
> > >
> > > I'd like to consider this a task force of RIF, OWL, and I guess
> > I18N, let you
> > > guys do the work and then report back to the WGs.
> > >
> > > OK?
> >
> > Ooops, yeah.   I've added www-archive to the cc list, so the e-mail
> > is
> > properly archived *somewhere*, at least.
> >
> > Shall I request a new mailing list for this?   public-rdf-
> > text@w3.org, I
> > guess?
> >
> > One odd thing that occured to me (during my sleep, I think) about
> > using
> > the RDF namespace is that the rdf:text datatype will never be used
> > in
> > (existing) RDF serializations, because they already have a way to
> > serialize such data.  Happily, this lets us avoid worrying about
> > the
> > constraint in RDF Syntax [1], "Any other names [in the RDF
> > namespace]
> > are not defined and SHOULD generate a warning when encountered".
> > We
> > should note this in the spec, I think.  Note also that future RDF
> > serializations might choose to use this, so they don't have to
> > special-case language-tagged strings.
> >
> >      -- Sandro
> >
> > [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-syntax-grammar-
> > 20040210/#section-Namespace
>