- From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
- Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2011 08:47:29 +0100
- To: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
- Cc: public-rdf-wg@w3.org, "Ivan Herman , Coralie Mercier , Guus Schreiber" <ivan@w3.org>
Hi Antoine, On 18 Jul 2011, at 21:21, Antoine Isaac wrote: >> Alan Ruttenberg wrote: >> without a language tag it is a string, with a language tag it is a pair of >> strings. The set of plain literals without language tags is *not* the >> set of pairs (string , ""). > > (which I think matches what is written in the RDF Concepts and Abstract Syntax) Alan is right. "foo" does *not* have a language tag. And RDF Concepts is the normative reference here. Other specifications and implementations may explicitly treat an empty string as absence of a language tag, but that doesn't change anything. Note that in the editor's draft for the upcoming RDF 1.1 Concepts [1] (Section 6.5), this is a lot clearer because all literals now are either "typed" or "language-tagged". Best, Richard [1] http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-concepts/index.html
Received on Friday, 22 July 2011 07:48:00 UTC