- From: Niklas Lindström <lindstream@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2007 15:22:29 +0200
- To: "Hausenblas, Michael" <michael.hausenblas@joanneum.at>
- Cc: public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org
[I'm sorry, Michael, I meant to reply-all.] Ah, now I remember. Thank you, I had forgotten to check it out again. In general I find the hybrid approach fine for all the needs I have come upon. And my concerns are clearly mentioned in "Issues". 1. This I hope to be a part of the resolution: * _always_ use the language when establishing plain literals Which (it seems) would involve updating the process flow chart, in the case of "literal -> no @content -> no @datatype -> no markup" to explicitly say "and evaluate xml:lang". For completeness - would it be useful to explicitly state: * xml:lang="" to indicate no language ? To make clear that it is intentionally allowed (of course, as per <http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml/#sec-lang-tag>). 2. Less obvious (and I will not argue this further if the current resolution goes against it): * datatype="" to indicate no type Would this also mean that the following: <tr about="..." property="foaf:name" datatype="" xml:lang=""> <td>Some</td> <td>Body</td> </tr> will yield: <...> foaf:name "Some Body" . ? I.e. meaning that "@datatype is present -> @datatype is empty" would always yield a plain, stripped literal. If this is the case, it seems the flow chart should to be updated for that too (since no hybrid-mode check for contained markup should be done if @datatype=""). Best regards, Niklas On 6/14/07, Hausenblas, Michael <michael.hausenblas@joanneum.at> wrote: > > Niklas, > > Thanks for sharing your concerns. Just a quick check: > Did you have a look at [1], already? > > Cheers, > Michael > > [1] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/RDFa/LiteralObject > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > Michael Hausenblas, MSc. > Institute of Information Systems & Information Management > JOANNEUM RESEARCH Forschungsgesellschaft mbH > > http://www.joanneum.at/iis/ > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf-request@w3.org > >[mailto:public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of > >Niklas Lindström > >Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 11:16 PM > >To: public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org > >Subject: Literals and turning off datatype/language > > > > > >Hello all! > > > >The telecon for this Thursday (June 14th) aims to make official the > >resolution to ISSUE-25 - Default Datatype for Literals. This is not an > >attempt to re-raise the long-running debate. I do however have two > >concerns I'd like to voice before the issue is resolved. (I must admit > >I wasn't sure that a consensus had been reached..) Hopefully this is > >already as things are intended to work. > > > > > >My concerns are: > > > >1) It should be possible to "turn off" datatyping, regardless of > >whether rdf:XMLLiteral is the default or not. *Requiring* the author > >to resort to @content could IMO discourage adoption of RDFa in > >some/many cases. The reasons are: > > > > - A datatyped literal has no language information. > > - Given the same string values, a datatyped literal is not the > >same as a plain literal. > > > >Turning off datatyping should be done with an empty @datatype. Thus: > > > > <html ... xml:lang="en"> > > <head> > > <title property="dc:title" datatype="">The Story > >Of Language</title> > > > >should yield: > > > > <> dc:title "The Story Of Language"@en . > > > > > >2) It should be possible to "turn off" language scope. The reason is: > > > > - Given the same string values, a literal with language is not the > >same as a plain literal. > > > >Turning off language scope should be done with an empty @xml:lang. > >Thus (combined with turning off datatype): > > > > <p property="foaf:name" datatype="" xml:lang="">Some Body</p> > > > >should yield: > > > > <> foaf:name "Some Body" . > > > > > >That is all. As said, this may already be the default behaviour, > >either implicitly or because I have failed to see it in the > >specification (this *is* how xml:lang is supposed to work as described > >at <http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml/#sec-lang-tag>). If not, I hope that > >this can be agreed upon and possibly added explicitly to avoid > >misunderstandings. > > > > > >Best regards, > >Niklas Lindström > > > > > > >
Received on Thursday, 14 June 2007 13:22:32 UTC