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

RE: weekly call for agenda items

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2002 16:31:42 +0100
To: "Graham Klyne" <GK@NineByNine.org>, "pat hayes" <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Cc: "Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>

> I think we can fairly safely assume that RDF implementations can
> determine
> character-level equivalence between XML literals.  But it will be
> problematic for some applications (think: DPH) if the ability to
> determine
> deeper levels of equivalence is required.  I'm not sure why we *need* any
> deeper level than character equivalence.  I think this falls into
> the same
> category as being able to detect entailments:  some true facts may be
> overlooked, but we don't end up concluding falsehoods.

I am feeling happier with XML Literals now they are a datatype.
Graham's discussion above shows that failing to do canonicalization is
merely one of the many forms of incomplete reasoning that a
cheap-and-cheerful rdf implementation will exhibit.

Received on Tuesday, 26 November 2002 10:39:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:54:02 UTC