W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rif-wg@w3.org > May 2008

Re: rif:text == owl:internationalizedString

From: Jos de Bruijn <debruijn@inf.unibz.it>
Date: Tue, 06 May 2008 15:01:41 +0200
Message-ID: <482056B5.90105@inf.unibz.it>
To: rif WG <public-rif-wg@w3.org>

Sandro Hawke wrote:
> OWL has just re-invented rif:text.   See:
>     The unary datatype owl:internationalizedString represents pairs of
>     strings and language tags, and thus represents plain RDF literals
>     with a language tag. The lexical space of this datatype is a string
>     of the form "text@languageTag"; thus, the text of each lexical value
>     before last @ sign is the actual text, and the text after the last @
>     sign is the language tag of the constant. Each such lexical value is
>     interpreted as a pair <"text",languageTag>.  
>            - http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Syntax#Datatypes
> and 
>     The value space for owl:internationalizedString consists of all pairs
>     <"text",languageTag>, where "text" is a string and languageTag is a
>     language tag.
>            - http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Semantics#Datatype_Maps
> They added a shortcut to their presentation syntax (which they called
> their "functional syntax") :
>     EXAMPLE: 
>     "Padre de familia"@es is an abbreviation to an internationalized
>     constant "Padre de familia@es"^^xsd:internationalizedString -- that
>     is, a pair consisting of the string "Padre de familia" and the
>     language tag es denoting the Spanish language. Note that the lexical
>     values of xsd:internationalizedString constants are strings that
>     contain the actual string value, the @ sign, and the language tag,
>     without any spaces between them.
>            - http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Syntax#Constants
> This is not particularly surprising -- in retrospect, RDF Core should
> have done this in RDF when they developed language tags.  It is
> reassuring that both groups came up with the same design (as odd as it
> is, putting the language tag inside the string!).
> Moving forward, I think we (both groups, at least, maybe consulting with
> SWIG and the XML Schema) need to pick one name:
>      - {rif,owl,rdf,xsd, ...?}:{text, internationalizedString, ...?}
> and decide which WG will get it through the process first.  It might
> make sense to split this out into it's own Recommendation-Track
> document.  It might just qualify as the shortest-ever Rec, but that
> seems fine.

makes sense.

> (Does anyone remember where we got on talking to XML Schema WG about
> this?)

the conclusion was that the XML schema working group was not interested
in this datatype, because in the XML world you would simply construct a
complex datatype for representing these things.

Best, Jos

>          -- Sandro

Jos de Bruijn            debruijn@inf.unibz.it
+390471016224         http://www.debruijn.net/
An expert is a person who has made all the
mistakes that can be made in a very narrow
    - Niels Bohr

Received on Tuesday, 6 May 2008 13:02:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:07:44 UTC