RE: RDF Concepts: Add definition for literals that are not language-tagged strings

Thanks Antoine, I wasn't aware of this. Do you (or others) think it would be
worth to revisit this issue?


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Antoine Zimmermann [mailto:antoine.zimmermann@emse.fr]
> Sent: Thursday, July 04, 2013 3:19 PM
> To: markus.lanthaler@gmx.net
> Cc: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
> Subject: Re: RDF Concepts: Add definition for literals that are not
> language-tagged strings
> 
> This is ISSUE-93, raised in August 2012 and closed soon after. The
> decision was "we do not give a name to this subset".
> 
> ISSUE-93: Give a name to "literals that are not language-tagged
> strings"
> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/93
> 
> 
> Richard's arguments to close the issue:
> 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2012Aug/0172.html
> 
> 
> Pat, however, made a proposal: "tagless literals".
> 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2012Aug/0181.html
> 
> 
> 
> AZ.
> 
> 
> 
> Le 04/07/2013 12:43, Markus Lanthaler a écrit :
> > RDF Concepts currently only defines the subset of literals that are
> > language-tagged strings. There's no name for literals that are not
> > language-tagged strings. In JSON-LD we use "typed value" for that
> class of
> > literals. I would like to propose to add such a definition to RDF
> Concepts.
> >
> >
> > --
> > Markus Lanthaler
> > @markuslanthaler
> >
> >
> >
> 
> --
> Antoine Zimmermann
> ISCOD / LSTI - Institut Henri Fayol
> École Nationale Supérieure des Mines de Saint-Étienne
> 158 cours Fauriel
> 42023 Saint-Étienne Cedex 2
> France
> Tél:+33(0)4 77 42 66 03
> Fax:+33(0)4 77 42 66 66
> http://zimmer.aprilfoolsreview.com/

Received on Thursday, 4 July 2013 16:20:36 UTC