W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-comments@w3.org > January to March 2002

Re: Proposed NTriples changes for literal notation

From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 17:12:28 +0200
To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, Seth Russell <seth@robustai.net>, ext Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>, RDF Comments <www-rdf-comments@w3.org>
CC: RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <B8B7DBFC.10CD1%patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
On 2002-03-15 11:48, "ext Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com> wrote:

> Jenny ex:age "35"en-US .
> <==>
> Jenny ex:age _:x .
> _:x rdfs:dlex "35" .
> _:x rdfs:lang "en_US" .

I'm not sure if attaching the language property to
the same node as the rdfs:dlex is correct. I
would think that the language is qualifying the lexical
form, not the thing denoted by the lexical form.

Perhaps rdf:value, treated as expressing equality is

 Jenny ex:age _:x .
 _:x rdfs:dlex _:y .
 _:y rdf:value "35" .
 _:y xml:lang "en_US" .

(I think we should try to use xml:lang rather than
 make our own property rdfs:lang, no need to reinvent
 the wheel)

I'm also concerned about having to parse the actual
literals to derive such implications. If literal
structures are opaque, then a generic RDFS reasoner
won't be able to give us the above.


Patrick Stickler              Phone: +358 50 483 9453
Senior Research Scientist     Fax:   +358 7180 35409
Nokia Research Center         Email: patrick.stickler@nokia.com
Received on Friday, 15 March 2002 10:10:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:43:59 UTC