- From: RDF Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2011 18:19:09 +0000
- To: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
RDF-ISSUE-71 (String Literals 2): Reconcile various forms of string literals (time permitting) [Cleanup tasks] http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/71 Raised by: Richard Cyganiak On product: Cleanup tasks At the moment we have two different ways of expressing a simple string: - xsd:string - rdf:PlainLiteral and two different ways of expressing a string with language tag: - lanuage-tagged literal - rdf:PlainLiteral They are very very close to one another but they are officially different. There is no way to say that the range of a property is “any language-tagged string” without going all the way to OWL. The only way to say that the range of a property is “any string, language-tagged or not” is by using rdf:PlainLiteral. rdf:PlainLiteral is nowhere referenced in the core RDF specs. It uses a name (plain literal) that seems a bit inappropriate in light of the ISSUE-12 decision. And it is really weird because it defines lexical forms, and then forbids their use. In SPARQL, DATATYPE("foo") and DATATYPE("foo"^^xsd:string) is xsd:string, but DATATYE("foo"@en) is an error. All of these things are quite odd. Can we reduce or fix some of them?
Received on Thursday, 21 July 2011 18:19:09 UTC