Re: review of rdf:text

Phillips, Addison wrote:
>> This document is in good shape and is ready to be published.
> 
> A minor nit: the document has a dead reference to RFC 4646 which should be removed (the document correctly references BCP 47 instead, which is currently the same thing).

fixed.

> I18N Core WG would like some credit on this document as well :-). Perhaps an acknowledgement?

Added:
"This is an editors' draft being developed jointly by the RIF and OWL 
WGs with support of the I18N Core WG."

>> Important: The two characters use to delimit rdf:text values in the
>> page don't
>> render in my browser (firefox, windows).  I also checked explorer
>> on my machine
>> and they do not render there.
> 
> The two characters are both entities (⟨ and ⟩) which are U+27E8 and U+27E9 respectively. 
> See [1]. These are fairly uncommon characters that look a lot like parentheses.

replced by parentheses for the data values, but not for the facets... I 
wonder why we have < f v > (without comma) for the facet pairs and
( s,l ) (with comma) for the data value pairs.

>> Section 3: Why aren't there parallel versions of the length
>> functions for lang tags?
>
> Length functions have no practical meaning with language tags, whereas they are a useful property of strings.

answered already earlier along the same lines, I agree.


> Kind Regards,
> 
> Addison
> 
> 
> Addison Phillips
> Globalization Architect -- Lab126
> Chair -- W3C Internationalization Core WG
> 
> Internationalization is not a feature.
> It is an architecture.
> 
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2003/entities/2007doc/


-- 
Dr. Axel Polleres
Digital Enterprise Research Institute, National University of Ireland, 
Galway
email: axel.polleres@deri.org  url: http://www.polleres.net/

Received on Tuesday, 11 November 2008 16:58:10 UTC