Re: Fwd: getting language tags out of the fundamental model (ISSUE-12)

>>> 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" .


{ <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!)


>> Regards,
>> Dave
>>> Andy

Received on Tuesday, 31 May 2011 17:29:29 UTC