 |
 |
> > In this case, does the literal "2003-03-12" fit into "en-US", or > > is that an example of a squeeze...? > > > A literal with a language is a literal with a language. For instance > en-US hyphenation rules may apply. > > > <dc:created xml:lang="en-US" > rdf:datatype="&xsd;date">2003-03-12</dc:created> > > > CURRENTLY should have the same parse result as > > <dc:created xml:lang="en" rdf:datatype="&xsd;date">2003-03-12</dc:created> &xsd;date has its own hyphenation rules. IIRC X3.30 hyphenation rules favour omission so the closest thing to "2003-03-12" that could be considered "American" is "20030312". I agree that xml:lang has a place when such dates are inserted directly into a literal were language is relevant, e.g.: "By 2003-03-12 this should be finalized." is American and "By 2003-03-12 this should be finalised" is not. However that is quite different from the case here (most importantly in the cases where we have just a date it can be used by applications working with any language without translation).