CARVIEW |
Select Language
HTTP/2 200
date: Fri, 10 Oct 2025 23:52:26 GMT
content-type: text/html
content-encoding: gzip
last-modified: Thu, 13 Jul 2023 18:20:39 GMT
cache-control: max-age=2592000, public
expires: Sun, 09 Nov 2025 23:52:26 GMT
vary: Accept-Encoding
access-control-allow-origin: *
x-request-id: 98ca08097ac6c1b0
strict-transport-security: max-age=15552015; preload
x-frame-options: deny
x-xss-protection: 1; mode=block
cf-cache-status: EXPIRED
set-cookie: __cf_bm=RTN5JWywLKHggJJZujmtpiCHGz8kD8bhbHcg5bkKEJw-1760140346-1.0.1.1-usJLp5frhg98vqs_kLraruQWoWXc.TCbpOSqpvP72.CvTkzhiSnjNxqKlasH0BNFr2YWVi7hZb66J5rdBvRqsM5nhTOYAp80046SzEcvAK0; path=/; expires=Sat, 11-Oct-25 00:22:26 GMT; domain=.w3.org; HttpOnly; Secure; SameSite=None
server: cloudflare
cf-ray: 98ca08097ac6c1b0-BLR
alt-svc: h3=":443"; ma=86400
RE: typed literals and language tags - suggested sub-agenda from Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com on 2003-05-09 (w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org from May 2003)
RE: typed literals and language tags - suggested sub-agenda
- From: <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>
- Date: Fri, 9 May 2003 14:40:21 +0300
- To: <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <A03E60B17132A84F9B4BB5EEDE57957B5FBBC6@trebe006.europe.nokia.com>
> -----Original Message----- > From: ext Brian McBride [mailto:bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com] > Sent: 09 May, 2003 13:36 > To: Stickler Patrick (NMP/Tampere); jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com; > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > Subject: RE: typed literals and language tags - suggested sub-agenda > > > At 13:10 09/05/2003 +0300, Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com wrote: > > [...] > > >"We prefer one of the options 1-4 over no change" - Yes > > > >If Yes, then > > > > Prefered options: 4, 1 > > Can live with: 2 > > Can't live with: 3 (reason: making the wrapper real) > > Patrick, > > Thanks for input - its great to have. Could you expound a > little on the > can't live with - why does making the wrapper real cause you > a problem? Because it's not part of the literal as expressed by the author in the RDF/XML and thus one cannot trust that applications consuming that literal down the pipe will know if the wrapper element was added by the author or an RDF parser. I'm presuming that it is not illegal to say <rdf:Description rdf:about="#something"> <ex:foo rdf:parseType="Literal"> <rdf-wrapper xml:lang="en"> <p>Foo</p> </rdf-wrapper> </ex:foo> </rdf:Description> How do you differentiate that case with the following: <rdf:Description rdf:about="#something" xml:lang="en"> <ex:foo rdf:parseType="Literal"> <p>Foo</p> </ex:foo> </rdf:Description> In short, it smacks of being a hack, and not good design, and we do not have time to explore all the possible implications of taking this path. It was one thing to posit some abstraction of a wrapper element, it is something *very* different to make that wrapper element a real thing. Cheers, Patrick
Received on Friday, 9 May 2003 07:40:30 UTC