- From: Jeremy Carroll <jeremy@topquadrant.com>
- Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 22:00:29 -0700
- To: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
On 5/23/2011 6:22 PM, Pat Hayes wrote: > On May 23, 2011, at 1:10 PM, Jeremy Carroll wrote: > >> -0 >> >> I don't really see what the problem rdf:LanguageTaggedLiteral is trying to solve. > The problem is that without this (or something like it), there are RDF literals which are dissimilar to any other literal but have no type. So it is impossible to, for example, talk about the class of their values, to restrict queries to them, etc.. This problem - of literals with no type - was one the motivations for rdf:PlainLiteral in the first place. The new proposal takes some plain literals (without tags) and assimilates them to xsd;string, which cannot (for XSD reasons external to RDF) accept the values of tagged literals. So we need a type for those values, which are found nowhere else in RDF and need a home, and cannot be banned because i18n and Reuters, among others, want them. > thanks - that makes sense to me - I'll change to +0 Jeremy
Received on Tuesday, 24 May 2011 05:00:53 UTC