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>
Message-ID: <CEECKEAMDAJDDEDGJNBEEECBCAAA.jjc@hpl.hp.com>
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
          work.
        - 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#"
         xmlns:eg="http://example.org/">



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

   <!-- Dürst registers himself as a creator of the Charmod WD. -->
   <rdf:Description
rdf:about="http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-charmod-20020220">
   <!-- The ü below is a single character #xFC in NFC -->
      <dc:Creator eg:named="Dürst"/>
   </rdf:Description>

   <!-- 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"/>
   </rdf:Description>

   <!-- 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.
   -->

</rdf:RDF>


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


Jeremy
Received on Friday, 8 March 2002 11:17:30 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:46:15 EDT