- From: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
- Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 18:35:05 +0000
- To: Jie Bao <baojie@cs.rpi.edu>
- CC: "Phillips, Addison" <addison@amazon.com>, "public-rdf-text@w3.org" <public-rdf-text@w3.org>, Boris Motik <boris.motik@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
Jie Bao wrote: > Addison has answered the question for me :) - Thanks > > As to rationale, it was motivated by a comment from Martin Duerst on > Unicode reference in OWL. Please see details at * > http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/LC_Responses/MD1 > > Jie Thanks for the clarification. Fine for me, then! Axel > On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 11:43 AM, Phillips, Addison > <addison@amazon.com> wrote: >> Actually, Jie Bao's change is also dynamic (since it says "as >> updated from time to time by the publication of new versions"). >> What adding a specific version number does is establish a >> baseline---you mean "at least" 5.1.0. XML 1.0 5e did this too (as >> have other Specs). It's a good thing to do (since Unicode has >> steadily added things over time, this prevents someone from seizing >> on, say, version 3.0 and assuming you meant that). >> >> Addison Phillips Globalization Architect -- Lab126 Chair -- W3C >> Internationalization WG >> >> Internationalization is not a feature. It is an architecture. >> >> >>> -----Original Message----- From: public-rdf-text-request@w3.org >>> [mailto:public-rdf-text- request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Axel >>> Polleres Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2009 8:13 AM To: Jie Bao >>> Cc: public-rdf-text@w3.org; Boris Motik Subject: Re: Update >>> Unicode reference for rdf:text >>> >>> >>> Jie Bao wrote: >>>> Hi Axel and Boris >>>> >>>> As I didn't hear objection from you, I would go ahead and make >>> the >>>> change to the wiki. Please let me know if you or others have >>> comments. >>>> Jie >>>> >>>> On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 1:41 PM, Jie Bao <baojie@cs.rpi.edu> >>>> wrote: >>>>> Axel: >>>>> >>>>> It was suggested at the OWL meeting we update the Unicode >>> reference >>>>> for rdf:text with the following text. The main change is >>>>> adding >>> the >>>>> mention of a specific Unicode version. >>>>> >>>>> "Unicode The Unicode Consortium, The Unicode Standard, >>>>> Version >>> 5.1.0, >>>>> ISBN 0-321-48091-0, as updated from time to time by the >>> publication of >>>>> new versions. (See >>> http://www.unicode.org/unicode/standard/versions >>>>> for the latest version and additional information on versions >>>>> of >>> the >>>>> standard and of the Unicode Character Database)." >>>>> >>>>> Will you be ok with this change? >>>>> >>>>> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/InternationalizedStringSpec >>>>> >>>>> Jie >>> hmmm, I have a question on that... e.g. on the lang-tags, we >>> exlicitly refer to BPG-47 which is the "dynamic" link which >>> always points to the latest version of the spec where here you >>> seem to suggest just the opposite. >>> >>> In that sense, I'm not 100% sure. So, what is the ratonale of >>> going to static version in one (unicode) and dynamic version in >>> another case (lang tags)? >>> >>> Axel >>> >>>>> -- Jie http://www.cs.rpi.edu/~baojie >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> -- Dr. Axel Polleres Digital Enterprise Research Institute, >>> National University of Ireland, Galway email: >>> axel.polleres@deri.org url: http://www.polleres.net/ >> > > > -- Dr. Axel Polleres Digital Enterprise Research Institute, National University of Ireland, Galway email: axel.polleres@deri.org url: http://www.polleres.net/
Received on Wednesday, 11 February 2009 18:35:45 UTC