- From: Dave Reynolds <der@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Fri, 29 May 2009 12:04:52 +0100
- To: "Peter F.Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- CC: public-rdf-text@w3.org
Peter F.Patel-Schneider wrote: > http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/InternationalizedStringSpec > now has my edits with the changes from Pat/Jonathan? > and the extra sentence from Andy. > All edits have descriptions in the history page so you can see how the > document has evolved. > > Please take a look and see if you like it, taking into account the > continuing discussion on how exactly to best handle SPARQL. (1) The introduction section states: "This branching approach to the design for RDF literals complicates the specifications based on RDF, such as RIF and OWL." This is not correct, RIF is not "based on RDF", the motivation for rdf:text (sorry, rdf:PlainLiteral) in RIF is not as stated here. (2) The introduction goes on to state that it "does not change the conceptual model of RDF". This is also not correct. At present an API working over RDF which is asked for the datatype of a plain literal should return the programming equivalent of "there isn't one". After the spec such an API should return "rdf:PlainLiteral". It may not affect other specs, it may not affect the RDF that is exchanged but it *is* a change to the "conceptual model". Dave -- Hewlett-Packard Limited Registered Office: Cain Road, Bracknell, Berks RG12 1HN Registered No: 690597 England
Received on Friday, 29 May 2009 11:05:47 UTC