Re: Proposal for ISSUE-12, string literals

On 13 May 2011, at 16:51, Antoine Zimmermann wrote:
>> I think the sensible way would be:
>> 1) every literal has *both* a datatype and a (possibly empty) language tag;
> 
> If all literals have both, then you may have something like:
> 
> "2"^^xsd:integer@en
> 
> which is silly. Of course, you could forbid it but then the proposal sounds silly too:
> 
> "1) every literal has both a datatype and a language tag but the language tag is always empty except for some strings."
> 
> 
> "Either/or" instead of "both" seems preferable.
> 
> AZ

Uhm, you could have bothered to read at least one more line:

>> 2) of the built-in datatypes, only xsd:string can have non-empty language tags;

What is silly about that?

Richard



>> 3) plain literals and rdf:PlainLiterals don't exist;
>> 4) "foo" in concrete syntaxes is syntactic sugar for "foo"^^xsd:string.
>> 5) "foo"@en in concrete syntaxes is syntactic sugar for "foo"^^xsd:string@en.
>> 
>> This *might* work better than the rdf:PlainLiteral mess when translated into spec changes, but raises BC issues, and requires changes to syntax specs to add the syntactic sugar, so I prefer the proposal that says implementations MAY unify to plain literals, as it doesn't require changes to the abstract syntax.
>> 
>>> As long as the surface forms "foo" and "foo"^^xsd:string get normalized to the same thing (or systems have permission to do such normalization) then I'm happy.
>> 
>> Good to hear that.
>> 
>> Best,
>> Richard
> 
> 
> -- 
> Antoine Zimmermann
> Researcher at:
> Laboratoire d'InfoRmatique en Image et Systèmes d'information
> Database Group
> 7 Avenue Jean Capelle
> 69621 Villeurbanne Cedex
> France
> Tel: +33(0)4 72 43 61 74 - Fax: +33(0)4 72 43 87 13
> Lecturer at:
> Institut National des Sciences Appliquées de Lyon
> 20 Avenue Albert Einstein
> 69621 Villeurbanne Cedex
> France
> antoine.zimmermann@insa-lyon.fr
> http://zimmer.aprilfoolsreview.com/
>

Received on Friday, 13 May 2011 16:18:26 UTC