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

Re: Typed literals text

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2002 14:36:48 +0200
To: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <200210161436.48833.jjc@hpl.hp.com>

> I'm not sure why my earlier examples have not
> proven to be compelling that this is necessary. But datatyping
> and language are disjunct qualifications. E.g.

>   xsd:Name"Finland"-en
>   xsd:Name"Suomi"-fi

this is not compelling because it is non-standard.
XSD says:

NOTE: Many human languages have writing systems that require child elements 
for control of aspects such as bidirectional formating or ruby annotation 
(see [Ruby] and Section 8.2.4 Overriding the bidirectional algorithm: the BDO 
element of [HTML 4.01]). Thus, string, as a simple type that can contain only 
characters but not child elements, is often not suitable for representing 
text. In such situations, a complex type that allows mixed content should be 
considered. For more information, see Section 5.5 Any Element, Any Attribute 
of [XML Schema Language: Part 2 Primer]. 

If we are representing text then an XML Literal is appropriate.

Of course, in the other thread, this could be used as a further argument why 
we may need non-XSD types.

Received on Wednesday, 16 October 2002 08:38:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:24:16 UTC