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

Re: Unicode NFC - status, and RDF Concepts

From: Martin J. Dürst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 06:43:55 +0000
Cc: "www-international@w3.org, RDF Working Group WG" <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <4E9293F3.70305@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
To: Jeremy Carroll <jeremy@topquadrant.com>
Hello Jeremy,

Great to hear from you again after a long time!

On 2011/10/10 14:19, Jeremy Carroll wrote:
> 
> Several years ago, I was an editor of RDF Concepts and we included the
> following:
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-concepts-20040210/
> [[
> The string in both plain and typed literals is recommended to be in
> Unicode Normal Form C [NFC]. This is motivated by [CHARMOD] particularly
> section 4 Early Uniform Normalization.
> ]]
> and
> [[
> All literals have a lexical form being a Unicode [UNICODE] string, which
> SHOULD be in Normal Form C [NFC].
> ]]
> 
> As we review this document, it has been noted that the CHARMOD reference
> is out-of-date, the reference to, section 4 of
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-charmod-20030822/#sec-Normalization
> has been replaced by the fairly different
> http://www.w3.org/TR/charmod-norm/#sec-EarlyUniformNormalization
> and that WD seems to have been abandoned, and no consensus reached.
> 
> What advice, if any, do I18N experts offer the RDF WG, updating the
> advice of 2002?

I'd recommend to keep the text the same, and just tweak or remove the reference. I unfortunately didn't have enough time to follow changes in charmod-norm in detail, but I hope to be able to catch up with more active members of the WG next week at the Internationalization and Unicode Conference in San Jose.

Regards,    Martin.



Received on Monday, 10 October 2011 08:24:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:25:45 GMT