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

On 6 Nov 2012, at 22:38, Markus Lanthaler wrote:
> Was it considered that also literals with datatypes other
> than rdf:langString can be language-tagged? I'm specifically thinking of
> rdf:html for example..

Language tags don't make sense for the vast majority of datatypes. Asking existing implementations to change in order to be able to store language tags for integers and dates is a non-starter.

This leaves the option of adding language tags to only a limited set of datatypes, like rdf:HTML. The objection there is that this would add *more* exceptions to the design of RDF literals (where our goal was to make the handling of literals more uniform), and also rdf:HTML doesn't need it because it already has a mechanism for language annotation (<span lang="xx">).


> Thanks,
> Markus
> --
> Markus Lanthaler
> @markuslanthaler

Received on Wednesday, 7 November 2012 10:54:30 UTC