- From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
- Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 14:13:17 -0500
- To: public-rdfa-wg@w3.org
Received on Wednesday, 29 June 2011 19:13:43 UTC
Too lazy to check right now, but can a plain literal have a language? If not, then I say -1. Otherwise +1 On 6/29/2011 2:09 PM, Gregg Kellogg wrote: > On Jun 29, 2011, at 10:50 AM, Manu Sporny wrote: > >> RDF WG has just issued a decision on the long-standing xsd:string vs. >> plain literal debate: >> >> http://www.w3.org/blog/SW/2011/06/29/reconciling_various_forms_of_string_lite >> >> Should we update RDFa 1.1 Core Processing Sequence to ensure that >> anything typed as "xsd:string" generates a plain literal? > > +1 > >> -- manu >> >> -- >> Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny) >> President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc. >> blog: PaySwarm Developer Tools and Demo Released >> http://digitalbazaar.com/2011/05/05/payswarm-sandbox/ >> > > Gregg -- Shane McCarron Managing Director, Applied Testing and Technology, Inc. +1 763 786 8160 x120
Received on Wednesday, 29 June 2011 19:13:43 UTC