- From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
- Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2011 19:36:23 +0100
- To: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
- Cc: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
On 16 Jul 2011, at 16:52, Andy Seaborne wrote:
> I'd rather make DATATYPE("foo"@en) be honest and say that it returns datatype rdf:LangString.
You cannot do so without a hack.
Assuming you want to do that, the only question is whether that hack goes into the RDF spec or into the SPARQL spec.
I think it should go into the SPARQL spec.
Assuming that the rdf:PlainLiteral spec gets updated along the lines I suggested in [1], then that hack would even be nicely consistent with OWL and RIF.
If we put the hack into RDF, then the updated rdf:PlainLiteral spec would have to become a hack on top of another hack, and it would make it harder to get buy-in for updating that spec.
Best,
Richard
[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Jul/0048.html
Received on Wednesday, 20 July 2011 18:36:53 UTC