- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: 05 Jun 2003 10:39:07 -0500
- To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
On Thu, 2003-06-05 at 07:47, Jeremy Carroll wrote: > Issuette: > Should we change the term: "plain literal" to mean a literal of just a > lexical form, and then have a new term "language tagged literal"? Either is acceptable to me; the difference is editorial; I'm happy for the editor to take his pick. I'm pleased to see the following substantive change; it's responsive to my comment: > To avoid copying any goofiness in the > abstract syntax into the domain of discourse, > we have hence changed the following rule in rdf-mt: > http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-rdf-mt-20030123/#gddenot > From > "if E is a plain literal then I(E) = E" > to > http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/TR/WD-rdf-mt-20030117/#gddenot > "if E is a plain literal "aaa" then I(E) = aaa" > "if E is a language tagged literal "aaa"@ttt then I(E) = <aaa, ttt>" -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Thursday, 5 June 2003 11:51:54 UTC