- From: Antoine Zimmermann <antoine.zimmermann@insa-lyon.fr>
- Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 16:41:08 +0200
- To: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
Le 23/05/2011 16:24, Peter Frederick Patel-Schneider a écrit : > There would be an effect on the OWL 2 specs. At the very least, > rdf:LanguageTaggedLiteral would have to be added to the reserved > vocabulary. From the OWL 2 SS&FS: """IRIs with prefixes rdf:, rdfs:, xsd:, and owl: constitute the reserved vocabulary of OWL 2.""" so, no, we don't need to add rdf:LanguageTaggedLiteral to the reserved vocabulary since it is already in. Sections 4.3 and 5.7 of the structural spec should be > rewritten. I expect that other parts of this document would have to be > changed to reflect the new kind of lexical space. > > Other normative documents would probably have to be changed, including > the mapping to RDF, the RDF-based semantics, and profiles. If "foo"@en is declared as syntactic sugar in *all* concrete syntaxes, then the mapping will certainly "look" the same, although abstractly different, right? > There would be an effect on OWL 2 implementations. Each implementation > would have to handle this new form for strings. But that form of string will be forbidden to appear in concrete syntaxes, so would it cause real problems? > > Getting approval from the OWL WG for changes might be very difficult, as > there was much debate on rdf:PlainLiteral. I don't see any benefits of > rdf:LanguagedTaggedString over rdf:PlainLiteral. rdf:LanguagedTaggedString is not a replacement for rdf:PlainLiteral, it's a complement. AZ. I expect that > approval would be contingent on approval from the OWL WG. > > > peter > > > > From: Ivan Herman<ivan@w3.org> > Subject: Re: Action-48 text: a New Plan for plain literals > Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 03:18:00 -0500 > >> Peter, Axel >> >> I believe the answer will be 'no', but I just want to check: would the >> introduction of a new type, and the special nature of the >> rdf:LanguageTaggedLiteral, have any effect on the OWL 2 and RIF specs >> from a functional point of view? >> >> Note that there is a plan to publish an edited recommendation for both >> OWL 2 and RIF when the new version of the XSD spec is published as a >> recommendation. At that point we can add a reference to >> rdf:LanguageTaggedLiteral to the RIF Datatypes[1] and the OWL 2 >> structural specification[2] documents (both documents explicitly list >> the datatypes they handle). Hm... it may not be as simple if the XSD >> spec comes out before the new RDF spec... >> >> Ivan >> >> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/rif-dtb/ >> [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-syntax/ >> >> >> On May 23, 2011, at 05:01 , Pat Hayes wrote: >> >>> The proposal outlined in the wiki here >>> >>> >> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/StringLiterals/LanguageTaggedLiteralDatatypeProposal >>> >>> completes Richard and my action item 48 from the last telecon. >>> >>> Pat > -- 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 Monday, 23 May 2011 14:41:37 UTC