Pat's draft

> http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes/RDFPlainLIteral.html

> Please see the redraft I just posted a link to. That is exactly the
> idea: that there should be an institutionalized confusion between RDF
> Plain literals and rdf:PlainLIteral literals, in that the latter are
> declared syntactically illegal and the former treated just as being
> the latter, semantically. Put another way, current syntax is
> re-defined to have the latter semantics. This isnt strict RDF, it is a
> semantic extension; but its such a small and useful one that I bet it
> will instantly become a de facto standard, and OWL and RIF are already
> semantic extensions anyway. And it completely eliminates the
> interoperability problems.

+1    I'm very happy with your draft.  Nice work!  

One small caveat.  The i18n paragraph was hammered out at considerable
length, with Addison Phillips and Michael Sperberg-McQueen.  We should
probably keep it, maybe with a few words making it clear that this is
"just so you don't misunderstand" stuff, and that the issues are exactly
the same as with RDF Plain Literals.  I think the point is that folks
often misunderstand i18n and since we're in that territory, it's a good
chance to point people in the right direction.

     -- Sandro

Received on Friday, 22 May 2009 00:40:08 UTC