- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2007 15:26:19 +0100
- To: Boris Motik <bmotik@cs.man.ac.uk>
- CC: "'Matthew Pocock'" <matthew.pocock@ncl.ac.uk>, public-owl-dev@w3.org, www-rdf-comments@w3.org
(Please delete cc to www-rdf-comments if replying on public-owl-dev) See RFC 4646 http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4646.txt obsoletes 3066 But http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-concepts/#section-Graph-Literal [[ Plain literals have a lexical form and optionally a language tag as defined by [RFC-3066], normalized to lowercase. ]] and http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml/#sec-lang-tag [[ The values of the attribute are language identifiers as defined by [IETF RFC 3066], Tags for the Identification of Languages, or its successor; in addition, the empty string may be specified. ]] Hmmm, seems like a bug in my text in rdf-concepts, the XML text is better, and refers to 4646 Jeremy Boris Motik wrote: > Hello, > > > > Yes, these were meant to be as in RFC 3066. I’ll add a note into the bug > list, so that we can repair this in course of the standardization process. > > > > Thanks for pointing this out! > > > > Boris > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *From:* public-owl-dev-request@w3.org > [mailto:public-owl-dev-request@w3.org] *On Behalf Of *Matthew Pocock > *Sent:* 03 April 2007 14:12 > *To:* public-owl-dev@w3.org > *Subject:* language tags > > > > Hi, > > The owl 1.1 spec uses languageTag in the definition of typedConstant. > This isn't referenced anywhere. Are these language tags according to rfc > 3066, or some other standard? Could we have a link to the relevant spec > in the document please? > > http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc3066.html > > Matthew > > (feeling extra pedantic today) > -- Hewlett-Packard Limited registered Office: Cain Road, Bracknell, Berks RG12 1HN Registered No: 690597 England
Received on Tuesday, 3 April 2007 14:26:43 UTC