- From: Phillips, Addison <addison@amazon.com>
- Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2008 10:46:53 -0800
- To: Jie Bao <baojie@cs.rpi.edu>, Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
- CC: "public-rdf-text@w3.org" <public-rdf-text@w3.org>
> > > I agree. I also suggest change 4.2 to "Comparison function of > rdf:text Values". I don't think that's grammatical English and would suggest you leave it as is. Separately, I note that 4.3.2, which defines 'fn:matches-language-range' says: -- Summary: returns true if the language tag part of $input is a valid language tag according to BCP-47 [BCP-47], and if it matches the language-range expression supplied as $range as specified by the algorithm for "Matching of Language Tags" which is part of BCP-47 [BCP-47]; otherwise, it returns false. -- It needs to say *which* matching algorithm in BCP47, since there are three! I suggest you say the "basic filtering" algorithm (since you define $range as 'language-range' and not as 'extended-language-range'). This is probably the right choice for rdf:text, although it precluded doing matching using specific subtags (i.e. you can't ask for "all text that has a 'script' of 'Latn'" by using the range "*-Latn"). Regards, Addison Addison Phillips Globalization Architect -- Lab126 Chair -- W3C Internationalization WG Editor -- RFC 4646, 4647 Internationalization is not a feature. It is an architecture.
Received on Wednesday, 10 December 2008 18:47:32 UTC