- From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 20:43:36 +0100
- To: Peter Frederick Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Cc: "<public-rdf-wg@w3.org>" <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Well, I try to keep a bit closer to what we have now. Here is my view... (To make things simpler at this point I do as if the xml literals had a root element. As Jerremy said this is not exactly true, but that can be folded in later) 1. The lexical space for XML literals are valid XML strings 2. The value space for XML literals are XML Infosets.[1] 3. The lexical to value mapping means parsing the XML string and build (some internal representation of) the infoset. 4. RDF serialization SHOULD attempt to parse XML Literals without chaning the input strings. If this is not possible, the transformation they perform should have the same value, ie, yield the same XML Infosets. That is it. Of course, one possible way of implementing vale space check is to use canonicalization. But one can also imagine a comparison of some internal representation of a DOM tree, for example; the details are not covered by the RDF standards. Ivan [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-infoset/ ---- Ivan Herman Tel:+31 641044153 http://www.ivan-herman.net On 16 Nov 2011, at 18:39, Peter Frederick Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com> wrote: > Here is my my proposal for rdf:XMLLiteral > 1/ The datatype rdf:XMLLiteral is a sub-datatype of xsd:string. > 2/ The lexical space of rdf:XMLLiteral is the set of finite-length > sequences of characters. > 3/ The value space of rdf:XMLLiteral is the set of finite-length > sequences of characters. > 4/ The lexical to value mapping for rdf:XMLLiteral is the identity > mapping. > 5/ RDF syntaxes may define a special syntax for rdf:XMLLiteral and the > parse process for that RDF syntax may modify the surface form into some > other lexical form. > 6a/ In RDF/XML, parseType literal is one of these special syntaxes and > the modification produces the canonical form. > 6b/ In RDF/XML, parseType literal is one of these special syntaxes and > the modification does not change the canonical form. > > > I prefer 6a. > > > peter >
Received on Wednesday, 16 November 2011 19:44:10 UTC