RE: typed literals and language tags - two proposals

If it comes to a vote, please accept my proxy vote
in strong favor of Option 1.

Patrick


> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Jeremy Carroll [mailto:jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com]
> Sent: 08 May, 2003 15:39
> To: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
> Subject: typed literals and language tags - two proposals
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> These are for the Option 1 and Option 3, I will keep those names.
> 
> Both options:
> 
> PROPOSE reopen
>    pfps-08 reagle-01 reagle-02
> 
> then
> 
> ... (below)
> 
> then
>    propose close
>    pfps-08 reagle-01 reagle-02
> accepting all three comments.
> 
> 
> Option 1:
> 
> PROPOSE
>    XML Literals are as in the working drafts prior to 
> November 2002, in 
> which it was not a typed literal, but a special sort of literal,
> with the changes made as a result of the reagle-01 and 
> reagle-02 issues. 
> (i,e. exc-c14n performed in the syntax document)
>    Typed literals to exclude the language tag in the abstract syntax.
> 
> editors of Syntax, Concepts, Test and Semantics actioned to 
> come back with 
> text, based on current editors drafts, and last version 
> before we switched 
> to the rdf:XMLLiteral type, for the group approval.
> 
> Option 3:
> PROPOSE
>    Typed literals, including XML Literal, to exclude the 
> language tag in 
> the abstract syntax.
>    XML Literals to be refactored by deleting the 
> <rdf-wrapper> text from 
> concepts and putting it into syntax (probably in para 7.2.17).
>    Add the following implementation note (or similar) to syntax.
>    Change NTriples in test cases to show explicit 
> <rdf-wrapper> for all 
> XMLLiterals.
> 
> editors of Syntax, Concepts, Test and Semantics actioned to 
> come back with 
> text, based on current editors drafts, and issue resolution 
> for the group 
> approval.
> 
> Suggested implementation note for Syntax doc:
> [[[
> NOTE: Implementors are reminded that they are free to 
> represent the RDF 
> graph in whatever way is appropriate, and there is no 
> obligation to use 
> N-triples or any specific concrete representation of the 
> abstract syntax. 
> Specifically, RDF/XML implementations that wish to manipulate 
> XML Literals 
> as XML may find it more appropriate to represent this lexical 
> form as two 
> components: the XML element content and the language tag (if 
> any) - these 
> two components could be combined to give the abstract syntax 
> representation 
> if needed.
> ]]]
> 
> Jeremy
> 
>

Received on Friday, 9 May 2003 05:41:37 UTC