- From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
- Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2009 11:31:57 -0500
- To: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
- Cc: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>, "Seaborne, Andy" <andy.seaborne@hp.com>, "Peter F.Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>, "sandro@w3.org" <sandro@w3.org>, "public-rdf-text@w3.org" <public-rdf-text@w3.org>
On Jun 3, 2009, at 11:11 AM, Axel Polleres wrote: > Alan Ruttenberg wrote: >>> My problem is that Option 1 [1] seems to signal that the sheer >>> existence of >>> such data invalidates the spec. That is actually why I think >>> Option 2 is >>> sufficient/better, as it confines that effects just to anybody >>> who does care about rdf:PlainLiteral (and thus OWL2 and RIF who are >>> referring to it. >> I do understand your issue with the wording. Would it help to change >> the "do" to "will" or "would" to further clarify that this sentence >> is >> a consequence of the previous? > > I would say it would help to change the wording, yes. > Not convinced that "will"/"would" fix it. However, as stated several > times, I am fine with the rewording proposed earlier as Option 2: > > Therefore, typed literals with rdf:PlainLiteral as the > datatype are considered by this specification to be not valid in > syntaxes for RDF graphs or SPARQL. > > Is there a problem with/objections against this? Not a problem exactly, but it seems almost precious in its self- referencing care. Since this text is part of the specification, its obviously the specification speaking. So why not just bite the bullet and say MUST NOT, as in "Therefore, typed literals with rdf:PlainLiteral as the datatype MUST NOT be used in syntaxes for RDF graphs or SPARQL." If someone were to object: but RDF allows that, then the obvious response is, Yes, but I'm not the RDF spec, and what I say is, <see above>. Pat > > Axel > >> -Alan > > > -- > Dr. Axel Polleres > Digital Enterprise Research Institute, National University of > Ireland, Galway > email: axel.polleres@deri.org url: http://www.polleres.net/ > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax FL 32502 (850)291 0667 mobile phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
Received on Wednesday, 3 June 2009 16:33:05 UTC