- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2000 09:53:58 -0400 (EDT)
- To: "Ralph R. Swick" <swick@w3.org>
- cc: sw99@w3.org
On Fri, 7 Apr 2000, Ralph R. Swick wrote:
> At 07:22 PM 4/6/2000 -0500, Ora.Lassila@nokia.com wrote:
> >Regarding the xml:lang, I don't think it is a bug. I always thought that it
> >would be a characteristic of the string (the literal value), and since M+S
> >did not really address primitive data types, it wouldn't have to be
> >concerned of xml:lang either.
>
> It was the I18N Working Group who pressured us into not exposing
> xml:lang in the RDF graph.
>
> "RDF Model and Syntax Open,Deferred,Closed Issues"
> http://www.w3.org/RDF/Group/Syntax/issuesd.html#c8
>
> C.8. Support for language tagging (xml:lang)
> -closed in 19980111;
>
> See also "Internationalization Review of RDF M&S"
> http://www.w3.org/International/Group/1998/10/NOTE-i18n-rev-rdfms-19981023.html#xmllang
>
> But sw99 is not the best place to be discussing the details of
> any of these issues (even though it's at least publicly archived
> so we can cite pertinent messages elsewhere).
> mailto:www-rdf-comments@w3.org is better, and
> mailto:www-rdf-interest@w3.org is more better.
OK, let's move this to the RDF IG list please!
Ralph -- see you on www-rdf-interest :-)
>
> >How do we propose adding it? As a qualification of the actual property
> >value?
>
> I'd actually like to see more structure inside text exposed to
> the RDF model. E.g. I'd like text to have a content-type so
> I could know that it was supposed to be application/xml or ...
>
> I'd also use this to handle units of measure in a nicer way; e.g.
> the literals ("1",inch) and ("1",USDollar) are distinct and
> have RDF-visible properties.
Could we shadow literals with anonymous resources that bear their
properties somehow? (thinking somewhat out loud)
Is this a model, API, query langauge, web architecture question?
replies to mailto:www-rdf-interest@w3.org
Dan
Received on Friday, 7 April 2000 09:54:00 UTC