W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rif-wg@w3.org > April 2008

Re: DTB status (on today's agenda)

From: Michael Kifer <kifer@cs.sunysb.edu>
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2008 19:35:27 -0400
To: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
Cc: "Public-Rif-Wg (E-mail)" <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <15982.1209512127@cs.sunysb.edu>

> Michael Kifer wrote:
> >> Dear all,
> >>
> >> since DTB status is on the agenda today, I basically want to clarify in 
> >> the call today the following issues. I was anyway a bit occupied with 
> >> other things, but basically, I am still stuck, as long as these issues 
> >> are open, because any switch on them would mean unnecessary additional 
> >> work on editing over the whole document (as opposed doing it in one go 
> >> when they are clarified).
> >>
> >> ==============================================================================
> >>
> >>
> >> 1) As for CURIEs, is [1] a proposal which woulc achieve a majority?
> >> I would like it. I postponed further editing before the CURIE issues is 
> >> solved or before at least it was discussed in the Telconf., since I 
> >> don't want to change everything back again, when we decide something.
> >>
> >> I suggest to
> >>
> >> PROPOSE: Adopt the CURIE proposals of [1] for RIF's presentation syntax.
> >>
> >> [1] Sandro's final CURIE proposal: 
> >> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Apr/0134.html
> > 
> > As discussed, this still has the old problems that interpretation of the
> > macro : depends on the context and is too complex. Why not use a simple
> > concatenation macro and be done with it?
> Well, don't think this is a problem if "marcos" ie. prefixes are not 
> expanded within quotes and angle brackets. Why ist is a problem if 
> quotes or angle brackets escape the macro expansion? Otherwise, you can 
> get ambiguities.
> Axel

Here are the problems again:

   1.  Point Brackets


same as "http://purl.org/dc/terms/creator"^^rif:iri  - ok

   2.  CURIEs

    	 after:   PREFIX("dc", "http://purl.org/dc/terms/").


presumably "http://purl.org/dc/terms/creator"^^rif:iri - ok

   3.  Data Value (using Pointy Brackets for rif:uri)


Not ok: <http://www.w3.org/2007/rif#iri> is supposed to stand for
"http://purl.org/dc/terms/creator"^^rif:iri, so we have context sensitivity

   4.  Data Value (using CURIE rif:uri)

	 after:   PREFIX("rif", "http://www.w3.org/2007/rif#").


Context sensitivity. rif:iri here is supposed to stand for
http://www.w3.org/2007/rif#iri. But according to (2) above it stands for

If you are saying that rif:iri cannot be expanded into what it stands for
after the ^^ then it is even worse than context sensitivity.

In addition, I find the above rules too complex for me to retain in my
diminishing pool of long-term memory cells.
I prefer a simple macro that is akin to (but much simpler) than
C macros. XML entities is an example of this, but most people find them
ugly and they need to be defined in the presentation syntax anyway.
For instance,


    If the above is unacceptable, in the interests of moving things
forward, I think the following could be tolerated, although it is still
context-sensitive. It was proposed in the past by somebody (maybe not
exactly this):

1. After ^^ a curie expands by simple concatenation:


2. Standalone: expands into concatenation, enclosed in "..." and followed
   by ^^http://www.w3.org/2007/rif#iri:


This is simple enough and is sellable.

There is still an issue of what to do if somebody defines http as a prefix.
Also, leaving something like http://www.w3.org/2007/rif#iri hand around
without delimiters is problematic, especially since IRIs have many
different schemes. One possibility is to delimit these iris with single quotes:


or with double quotes.

Received on Tuesday, 29 April 2008 23:40:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:47:50 UTC