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

Re: migrating from M&S

From: Frank Manola <fmanola@mitre.org>
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 09:28:57 -0500
Message-ID: <3C6A7829.8080400@mitre.org>
To: Bill de hÓra <dehora@eircom.net>
CC: RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>

Bill de hÓra wrote:

>>Frank Manola:
>>a.  dispense with most, if not all, of P221:  not just the 
>>part that says that the language is considered part of the 
>>literal, but also the part that talks about RDF applications 
>>possibly considering language tagging in string matching and 
>>other processing.
> +1 for processing mandates. I can see objections to removing references
> to literals as pairs. I don't like it but as Brian sort of says, what's
> broken (other than our sensibilities)?

What's broken is what we're saying about what happens:  we ought to be 
clear about what we mean is supposed to happen, and what information is 
supposed to be present for RDF processors to handle.

>>b.  accept that the language information is *somehow* there 
>>in the literal (although the M&S doesn't say how).  
>>Effectively, that sounds like a pair.
>>[actually, maybe there's a c.:  change what we mean by "RDF
> I've asked for a definition before because of this paragraph. It's a bit
> of a rathole.

I believe it!


Frank Manola                   The MITRE Corporation
202 Burlington Road, MS A345   Bedford, MA 01730-1420
mailto:fmanola@mitre.org       voice: 781-271-8147   FAX: 781-271-875
Received on Wednesday, 13 February 2002 09:20:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:24:10 UTC