RE: weekly call for agenda items

> 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.

Jeremy