Re: danc-02 goofy literals [was 2 formalities in RDF concepts]

Dear Dan

on 6th June [1], RDF Core resolved the issue [2] you raised concerning goofy 
literals: The full resolution [3] is as in the e-mail archive, and includes 
the new text [4] found in the editors draft.

Our design of literals was a bit goofy, and we have changed it:
6.5 RDF Literals

A literal in an RDF graph contains one or two named components.

All literals have a lexical form being a Unicode [UNICODE] string in Normal 
Form C [NFC].

Plain literals have a lexical form and optionally a language tag as defined by 
[RFC-3066], normalized to lowercase.

Typed literals have a lexical form and a datatype URI being an RDF URI 
Moreover, we believe some of the concern was to do with the denotation of
literals in the domain of discourse. To avoid copying any goofiness in the
abstract syntax into the domain of discourse,
we have hence changed the following rule in RDF Semantics editors draft [5]:
"if E is a plain literal then I(E) = E"
"if E is a plain literal "aaa" then I(E) = aaa"
"if E is a plain literal "aaa"@ttt then I(E) = <aaa, ttt>"

The textual gloss is:
"Plain literals, without embedded datatypes, are always interpreted as
referring to themselves: either a character string or a pair consisting of
two character strings."

The informative text in concepts:
"As recommended in the RDF formal semantics [RDF-SEMANTICS], these plain
literals are self-denoting."
is unchanged.

Please reply to this email, copying indicating
whether this decision is acceptable.




Received on Monday, 30 June 2003 11:20:54 UTC