- From: Seth Russell <seth@robustai.net>
- Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 09:55:43 -0800
- To: "Patrick Stickler" <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>, "ext Tim Berners-Lee" <timbl@w3.org>, "RDF Comments" <www-rdf-comments@w3.org>
- Cc: "RDF Core" <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
From: "Patrick Stickler" <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
> > I hope that RDF will move toward unicode strings as primitives, and
> > langauges as properties. { "chat"en = [lang:en "chat"].}
>
> This would, of course, require untidy literals, and we just decided
> to make literals tidy.
>
> If languages as properties, in conjuction with literals as subjects,
> is truly is a desirable feature in the future, should we rethink tidy
> literals?
>
> If literals remain tidy, then that closes the door on languages
> as properties.
There must be some other assumption here; because we *can* have tidy
literals and { "chat"en = [lang:en "chat"].} and not use literals as
subjects just by letting the xml:lang attribute entail the extra Bnode.
see mentograph:
http://robustai.net/mentography/rdf_lang2.gif
Seth Russell
Received on Thursday, 14 March 2002 12:59:34 UTC