> On 12 Jan 2017, at 17:44, Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de> wrote: > > >> On 12 Jan 2017, at 15:55, Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk> wrote: >> >> On Wed, 11 Jan 2017 19:00:47 +0000, Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de> wrote: >>> Hi Stian, >>> >>> An answer cannot be determined with 100% certainty from the text. >>> >>> What is clear: >>> >>> - "Hello"@en and "Hello"@EN have the same value >>> - One MAY normalise "Hello"@EN to "Hello"@en >>> - In RDF 2004, "Hello"@en and "Hello"@EN were clearly equal >>> >>> RDF 2004 forced the language tag to be lower-cased in the abstract syntax. Implementations of RDF 2004 often did not do that, but retained the case when storing or transforming RDF, while still treating @en and @EN as equal. My recollection is that we wanted to change the language of the spec to make this behaviour legal. Unfortunately it seems the language came out less clear than it should be. I do not think that there was any intention to make @en and @EN not equal. >> >> OK, so "Hello"@en and "Hello"@EN are the same value ("Value Equal"), but they are NOT (in RDF 1.1) "Term Equal”? > > That’s not what I said. > > In RDF 2004, "Hello"@en and "Hello"@EN were the same term (that is, they are equal). > > I don’t recall an intention to change that behaviour in RDF 1.1. So, as best as I can recall, the intention was that these two terms should still be the same term (that is, equal) in RDF 1.1. > That is certainly how I remember. Ivan > Richard > > > > >> >> That would at least be along the same lines as "1"^^xsd:integer and "01"^^xsd:integer. >> >> -- >> Stian Soiland-Reyes >> > > ---- Ivan Herman, W3C Digital Publishing Technical Lead Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ mobile: +31-641044153 ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704Received on Thursday, 12 January 2017 16:49:21 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:59:51 UTC