- From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
- Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2011 09:07:48 -0500
- To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Cc: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>, public-rdf-wg@w3.org
On Jun 1, 2011, at 1:43 AM, Ivan Herman wrote:
> Andy,
>
> On May 31, 2011, at 19:28 , Andy Seaborne wrote:
>
>>
>>>>> Modelling everything at a very fine grained level moves the burden on
>>>>> to the application.
>>>>>
>>>>> c.f. RDF containers and collections.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Conditionally, yes. It would only arise when language tags are used.
>>>> Most strings do not use language tags.
>>
>> 1/ We find that there can be very lang-tag intensive datasets. For example, data from Wales.
>>
>> 2/ Don't we have a new variability to deal with:
>>
>> <s> skos:altLabel
>> [ a rdf:LinguisticExpression;
>> rdf:language "bar";
>> rdf:value "foo"] .
>>
>> <s> skos:altLabel "foo" .
>>
>>
>> And
>>
>> { <s> skos:altLabel ?altLabel }
>>
>> get us back to same problems of RDF collections and a round trip to get the next step in the information (assuming skolemization).
>>
>>>> The question is, IMO, whether the benefit of fixing the equivalences
>>>> between RDF strings is worth the pain to be experienced by users of
>>>> language tags in this context. *Personally* I would rather query the
>>>> above pattern than need to guess whether a string is a plain literal
>>>> or a language tagged string or an xsd:string.
>>
>> Not sure it's a guess unless we do nothing. At least they are all a single RDF term that can be queries then inspected.
>>
>> People here seem to want a datatype for all literals.
>>
>> If every plain literal now has a datatype, xsd:string or rdf:LangString (or other name), and use LANG knowing that rdf:LangString means use LANG to ask further i.e. Value space of ("foo", "en").
>>
>> rdf:lang-{langTag} requires dereferencing to get the language (or IRI mangling but maybe some invented a different IRI - no unique names here!)
>
> Just to check my understanding; what you are saying is:
>
> - if one goes along the lines originally proposed by Richard, ie, using rdf:LangString (or some similar name) then any SPARQL query involving a language becomes a bit cleaner because one can use lang(?v) in a FILTER or (in SPARQL 1.1) in an AS; whereas
> - if one defines a series of rdf:Lang-{langname} then queries (or applications) will have to fiddle around interpreting the URI-s.
I hope that is what Andy was saying, because this is what I was saying also :-)
>
> And that is quite a compelling argument against rdf:Lang-{langname} to me, I must admit
And to me.
Pat
>
> Ivan
>
>
>>
>> Andy
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Dave
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Andy
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> ----
> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
> mobile: +31-641044153
> PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973
40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office
Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax
FL 32502 (850)291 0667 mobile
phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
Received on Wednesday, 1 June 2011 14:08:19 UTC