- 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