RDF datatyping

Please copy www-rdf-comments (publicly archived) on responses to this
message.

Hello,

could someone (maybe Martin or Misha) have a quick look at the latest damage
we've done to RDF. The goal is to support XML schema datatypes, and  RDF
Core would particularly welcome an I18N perspective. We hope to be coming
back soon with a suite of last call drafts, so please don't blow your RDF
budget on this round (pre-last call).

A complete list of relevant sections can be found:

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Nov/0527.html

The most relevant bits to I18N are in RDF Concepts

http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-rdf-concepts-20021108/#section-Datatypes
http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-rdf-concepts-20021108/#section-Graph-Literal

A very specific issue that still surfaces from time-to-time, is whether it
is OK to have the language tag in typed literals?
It is there partly for uniformity and partly to support the legacy
rdf:parseType="Literal" within the datatyping framework (see
http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-rdf-concepts-20021108/#section-XMLLiteral
).
Currently the language tag is purely syntactic and is not allowed to have
semantic significance (except for the legacy XML literals).

Possible errors:
  A: the language tag just shouldn't be there on typed literals.
  B: the language tag should be permitted to have semantic import in typed
literals, but it MUST NOT be used for locale.

We are currently steering between these two ...

comments?



Jeremy

Received on Monday, 25 November 2002 10:53:03 UTC