Disimproved definition of literals in Concepts; close ISSUE-94?

I've messed with the definition of literals in order to address the concern raised here:

  ISSUE-94: Definition of literals does not include language-tagged strings properly
  http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/94

The new definition is this:

[[
A literal in an RDF graph consists of two or three elements:

 [lexical form]
 [datatype IRI]

A literal is a language-tagged string if and only if its datatype IRI is http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#langString, and only in this case the third element is present:

 [language tag]
]]
http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-concepts/index.html#dfn-literal


For the record, this was the old (equivalent) definition:


[[
A literal in an RDF graph consists of:

 [lexical form]
 [datatype IRI]

A language-tagged string is any literal whose datatype IRI is equal to http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#langString. In addition tolexical form and datatype IRI, a language-tagged string also has:

 [language tag]
]]


PROPOSAL: Close ISSUE-94 as addressed in the latest version of http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-concepts/index.html#dfn-literal

Received on Tuesday, 6 November 2012 20:13:30 UTC