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

Re: Case of language identifiers

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 11:06:40 +0200
To: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org

> FWIW, my preference is 2.  I think it will be most natural for the bulk of
> our intended audience.  It's also minimum change.  But I don't feel very
> strongly.

I agree this is minimal change.

>2: In the equality function in the abstract syntax, before datatyping and
>model theory.
>This is the current position. It has the defect that datatyping and the
>theory should then be expressed as operations over equivalence classes, in
>some way or other.

The problem that I have come against with this is simply the complexity of
Doing case normalization during parsing is easy to state, easy to explain,
and very nearly equivalent.

Doing case normalization by regarding case variations as syntactically
identically is basically a smart alec trick that someone like me must have
dreamt up, but may present unnecessary obstacles to non-mathematicians. It
also makes writing text for, for example, datatype mappings more complex.


PS: I will ask for input from i18n-ig on this thread.
Received on Thursday, 24 October 2002 05:07:21 UTC

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