- From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
- Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2011 10:09:35 +0000
- To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- CC: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>, Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>, RDF Working Group WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
On 07/03/11 09:05, Ivan Herman wrote: > > On Mar 6, 2011, at 17:37 , Andy Seaborne wrote: > > [snip] >> >> If we had that >> >> "foo" -> "foo"^^xsd:string >> "foo"@de -> "foo"^^xsd:lang-de >> "foo"^^xsd:string -> "foo"^^xsd:string >> >> i.e a datatype per language tag, > > I would not go there. The varieties of legal language tags is huge, and if anyone wanted to do some sort of a datatype reasoning with those, implementers may go mad:-) See: > > http://www.w3.org/International/questions/qa-choosing-language-tags > > for some niceties... So have a supertype? Having the lang tag encoded into the lexical form is a real nuisance. Makes things like "get me rdfs:labels preferrring Welsh" a matter of string-bashing and isn't that what we are trying to avoid with machine represented data? Andy
Received on Monday, 7 March 2011 10:10:15 UTC