Recognize rdf:dirLangString #60
Conversation
spec/index.html
Outdated
| @@ -815,8 +815,9 @@ <h2>Literals and datatypes</h2> | |||
| for that datatype. | |||
| </p> | |||
| <p>RDF processors are not required to <a>recognize</a> any datatype IRIs other than | |||
| <a data-cite="RDF12-CONCEPTS#dfn-language-tagged-string"><code>rdf:langString</code></a> | |||
| and <a data-cite="XMLSCHEMA11-2#string"><code>xsd:string</code></a>, | |||
| <a data-cite="XMLSCHEMA11-2#string"><code>xsd:string</code></a>, | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Reordered to put the more common datatype first.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
Sorry, something went wrong.
pfps
added
the
spec:enhancement
What change might be necessary? |
|
Concepts doesn't say that any datatype is REQUIRED, which seems to me to be needed if Semantics says that RDF reasoning REQUIRES some datatypes. |
|
This PR is not about the general issue. RDF Semantics does require The wider issue is elsewhere: |
|
I created w3c/rdf-concepts#122 explicitly about whether Concepts should discuss requirements for RDF entailment. |
|
@afs after reverting #52 per our resolution today, I tried to rebased this PR, but the formatting change created a conflict :-/ . I will work on it a little later. |
pchampin
force-pushed
the
dirlangstring
branch
from
cf6fe75 to
444459e
Compare
that's now fixed. This PR is rebased on the new main (i.e. after #52 has been reverted) |
If there are no intervening commits to preserve, it might be easier to just reset the head and force-push to eliminate those commits. |
|
Rebased to current main, preview and diff rebuilt. Editors - this is ready to merge. |
|
Closing. This PR is included in #64. |
See #59.
PR is included in #64.
Preview | Diff