- From: Antoine Zimmermann <antoine.zimmermann@insa-lyon.fr>
- Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 15:50:29 +0200
- To: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
- CC: public-rdf-wg <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Le 14/04/2011 14:13, Richard Cyganiak a écrit : > Antoine, > > You say that plain literals are for “utterance in an unspecified language”. No, I don't say they are, I say that I always thought of them as such. You may not share this point of view. > You also say that xsd:string is for “things like serial numbers, identifiers, passwords”. > > That distinction, I believe, springs only from your imagination. Can you back this up with links and quotations? The distinction only exists if one ignores XSD entailment, which at least some SPARQL engines do. Otherwise, the semantics makes no distinction between a literal of type xs:string and a plain literal with no lang tag (cf Peter's email) so I have no link to back me up. I don't want xs:string to be marked as archaic because if it is, then it means that I am not welcome to write something like: :passportNumber rdfs:range xs:string . Still, I am in favour of simplifying things, so instead of doing nothing, I would rather have plain literals without language tag removed altogether and replaced by typed literals of type xs:string. Regards, -- Antoine Zimmermann Researcher at: Laboratoire d'InfoRmatique en Image et Systèmes d'information Database Group 7 Avenue Jean Capelle 69621 Villeurbanne Cedex France Tel: +33(0)4 72 43 61 74 - Fax: +33(0)4 72 43 87 13 Lecturer at: Institut National des Sciences Appliquées de Lyon 20 Avenue Albert Einstein 69621 Villeurbanne Cedex France antoine.zimmermann@insa-lyon.fr http://zimmer.aprilfoolsreview.com/
Received on Thursday, 14 April 2011 13:50:59 UTC