- From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 21 May 2009 15:01:07 -0400
- To: public-rdf-text@w3.org
Can't we just say, as strongly as we need to, that rdf:text is NOT for
use in RDF? Instead it is for use in *non-RDF* systems which use XML
datatypes and want interoperability with RDF's language-tagged literals?
I know that hasn't been made very clear, to date. New title:
rdf:text -- an equivalent to RDF Plain Literals for non-RDF systems
We can be more precise about this in the body -- I like Dave Reynold's
description of how RIF is not an RDF system, but is still compatible --
but mostly this just seems like a PR problem.
I think there's also an open question of whether to allow empty language
tags, and whether RDF plain literals without language tags should be
mapped to xs:strings instead of rdf:text, but I bet we can solve those a
lot more easily after we're clear about rdf:text's place in the world.
-- Sandro
Received on Thursday, 21 May 2009 19:01:17 UTC