W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > March 2002

charmod literal

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 16:17:09 -0000
To: <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Graham said that he found the IRI examples not fully compelling, I wanted to
understand the WG's response to the literal based example below (from the
earlier zip).

If we do not find such examples compelling, IMO, it is only a political
problem of how to satisfy the I18N WG rather than a technical problem of how
to satisfy the I18N requirements as we see them for RDF. i.e. I think I have
adequately captured what the normalization issue is about in these examples.

<!-- 	Issue: charmod-literal
        Test:  1

        Example showing two different literals, that display the same.
        In a context where there is a unique naming convention, this can
        cause confusion, possibly moral and/or legal confusion.

        The use case consists of:
        - a site collecting Dublin Core data,
          using a unique names convention for individuals.
        - One of the editors of Charmod registers himself and his
        - Someone else, with the same name, creator of an adult internet
          site, registers a different but visually indistinguishable
          name; along with his work.
        - The consumers of both works get confused and disappointed,
          probably to the detriment of at least one of the Martins.
        - This file consists of some of the (ill-formed) RDF used by the
          metadata site.


<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"

   <!-- An author database uses the property eg:name with a
        unique naming convention.

   <!-- Dürst registers himself as a creator of the Charmod WD. -->
   <!-- The ü below is a single character #xFC in NFC -->
      <dc:Creator eg:named="Dürst"/>

   <!-- Someone else registers himself under the unused name of Du?rst,
        along with some other creation as its creator. -->
   <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://example.org/adult-content.html">
   <!-- The u? below is two characters a u followed by
          #x308. It should be displayed identically to  ü. -->
      <dc:Creator eg:named="Du?rst"/>

   <!-- Readers of such data will be given no visual indication that
   these are two different people despite the unique naming convention.
   This example minimally shows significant risk of confusion.


With an unambiguous property declaration from an ontology layer this can be
done entirely within (future) W3C specs.

Received on Friday, 8 March 2002 11:17:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:53:56 UTC