W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > February 2002

Re: Datatypes and xml:lang

From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2002 18:38:32 -0600
Message-Id: <p0510144fb8877c91e8f4@[]>
To: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
>On 2002-02-06 20:45, "ext Pat Hayes" <phayes@ai.uwf.edu> wrote:
>>>  Additional issue:
>>>  I think it is also necessary to clarify the relationship
>>>  between xml:lang and xsd:lang, as it seems that the latter
>>>  is the range of the former, but this has never been
>>>  explicitly defined.
>>  In the OMG MT,
>>  aaa rdf:type rdf:Datatype .
>>  would entail
>>  aaa rdf:range aaa .
>>  which may seem odd but is required to allow both subproperty of
>>  rdf:value and also range/type assignments. And it does make semantic
>>  sense in the MT.
>>  So with this convention, I think that using either xml:lang or
>>  xsd:lang as an RDF datatype will implicitly assume that they are
>>  treated as identical as far as RDF is concerned.
>But they're not identitical. They are related, but not the
>same. One is a property which ascribes language context
>to some resource. The other is a controlled, enumerated
>vocabulary of language codes. These are not the same thing.
>If the MT treats them as the same. Then something is wrong.

OK, let me back off from this, as I don't know what Im talking about. 
I only meant that being ones own range is a characteristic of 
datatypes in the proposed simple MT. If there's more to this xml/xsd 
distinction than that, then forget it.

IHMC					(850)434 8903   home
40 South Alcaniz St.			(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola,  FL 32501			(850)202 4440   fax
Received on Wednesday, 6 February 2002 19:37:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:24:09 UTC