W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > November 2011

Re: ISSUE-13: History of rdf:XMLLiteral

From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2011 11:59:27 +0000
Message-ID: <4EBD0E1F.3030506@epimorphics.com>
To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
CC: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>, Jeremy Carroll <jeremy@topquadrant.com>, RDF Working Group WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>


On 11/11/11 09:01, Ivan Herman wrote:
>
> On Nov 10, 2011, at 23:44 , Richard Cyganiak wrote:
>
>> Hi Jeremy,
>>
>> On 10 Nov 2011, at 22:26, Jeremy Carroll wrote:
>>> An RDF/XML parser should do the C14N step, it is not that hard, and so many do. And for a lot of purposes, even if you mess up on the C14N step it does not matter so much, because the sort of app that does a lot of comparisons is typically logic heavy, and does not use XML Literals, whereas the sort of app that uses XML Literals is web processing heavy, and isn't very logical, and often doesn't do much comparison
>>
>> Well then let's make that explicit.
>>
>> Require C14N only as part of the L2V mapping and not in the lexical form, so that the parsers who mess up are actually conforming. This way we might even get a chance to use rdf:XMLLiteral in Turtle, where we currently need to canonicalize *by hand*.
>>
>> And make rdf:XMLLiteral an optional part of the datatype map (like the XSD types) so that apps who don't need to compare XML values can just treat it as opaque blobs.
>>
>
> I agree with both of the above.

+1

I don't want to require a Turtle parser to have an XML parser inside it.


Real world: an experienced RDF user, let's call him John, at the 
Ordnance Survey, created some RDF with GML as RDF XMLLiterals by taking 
existing, valid GML and putting it in RDF as ^^rdf:XMLLiterals.  But the 
attributes weren't sorted alphabetically.  Result: illegal RDF 
XMLLiterals and confusion when some picky validator downstream 
complained.  John's local parser did not check; only when loading into a 
remote service were the rdf:XMLLiterals checked.  Said validator used 
JJC-written code :-)

	Andy
Received on Friday, 11 November 2011 12:00:05 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:25:46 GMT