  Re: rdfms-xmllang alternatives  From: Graham Klyne
<Graham.Klyne@Baltimore.com> Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 15:59:09
+0100 Message-Id: <> To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com> >I
took an action at the last teleconference to write up
>alternative ways of resolving this issue. >Option 1: No Change
>This is an issue that has caused some confusion amongst
developers >to explain more clearly what is going on. >languague
component of a literal. >This is the simplest resolution.  It
makes significant change to >be unaffected.  It requires only
one triple to represent a >property with a literal value. >Does
not represent language as a triple so requires special >purpose
processing to support, for example query.  Another possible
disadvantage?:  not all literals are in some language.  It
doesn't really make sense to specify a language for, say, a
decimal number  or a MIME type string.  Thus, we have some
literals whose interpretation is  dependent on an associated
language attribute, and others whose  interpretation m