RE: simple literals in concrete RDF syntaxes

• From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
• Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 11:48:11 +0100
• To: "'RDF WG'" <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
• Message-ID: <00fc01ce14d7$f0931be0$d1b953a0$@lanthaler@gmx.net>

On Wednesday, February 27, 2013 11:02 AM, Antoine Zimmermann wrote:
 
> Hmm, reading the concept of simple literals again, I find it strange.
> It
> seems to me that simple literals is something that exists at an
> abstract
> level, as a simple literal can be concretely serialised in many ways,
> yet the spec says that it only exists in concrete syntaxes.
> 
> [...]
> 
> So, maybe we should not say anything about simple literals in concepts,
> and let the concrete syntaxes specify what syntactic sugar they use for
> literals, whatever their types.

+1 I think that's something that's completely serialization-format-specific
and should thus be defined as part of the format's spec. 


--
Markus Lanthaler
@markuslanthaler

Received on Wednesday, 27 February 2013 10:48:43 UTC