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

On Wednesday, November 14, 2012 4:34 PM, Andy Seaborne
> [ rdf:value "....."^^rdf:HTML ;
>    ex:language   "en"
> ]
> c.f. units.

Yeah, that's the way to work around it. It would be nice if rdf:language
would exist for that (I know there exists dc:language and many more). 

On Wednesday, November 14, 2012 6:17 PM, Richard Cyganiak wrote:
> > There are certainly a lot of other data types that could profit from
> > language tags, just think of Markdown, Textile, all the Wiki
> syntaxes, etc.
> > yet there's no way language-tag them. That's exactly what triggered
> my
> > question.
> Well, back in 2004, W3C still believed that in the future everything
> would be XML and therefore would already support language annotation.
> And today there's no way of retrofitting language tags onto typed
> literals without breaking all existing parsers and stores, therefore
> it's more than unlikely to happen.

OK.. fair enough.

Thanks a lot,

Markus Lanthaler

Received on Wednesday, 14 November 2012 17:30:06 UTC