Re: Proposed NTriples changes for literal notation

From: "Patrick Stickler" <>

> > 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:

Seth Russell

Received on Thursday, 14 March 2002 12:59:34 UTC