- From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
- Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 12:34:03 +0100
- To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Cc: Lee Feigenbaum <lee@thefigtrees.net>, antoine.zimmermann@insa-lyon.fr, public-rdf-wg <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
On 17 Apr 2011, at 12:02, Ivan Herman wrote:
>>> Ie, datatype("chat"@en) would return rdf:PlainLiteral.
>>
>> This would be consistent with the definition of the datatype. But since the value space of rdf:PlainLiteral also contains all simple strings, the same could be said for returning
>>
>> datatype("chat") == rdf:PlainLiteral
>
> Correct. Would that create huge problems?
Well, at the moment I can say:
:p rdfs:range xsd:string .
to indicate that "chat"^^xsd:string would be a valid value of the property. Assuming this usage remains legal, even if we say that "chat" and "chat"^^xsd:string must be normalized, then I would expect that
datatype("chat"^^xsd:string) == xsd:string
datatype("chat") == xsd:string
I would find
datatype("chat") == rdf:PlainLiteral
rather confusing.
Best,
Richard
Received on Sunday, 17 April 2011 11:34:32 UTC