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

RE: Datatypes, abstract syntax / data model.

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2002 10:39:03 +0200
To: "Graham Klyne" <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>, "Jan Grant" <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>
Cc: "RDFCore Working Group" <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <BHEGLCKMOHGLGNOKPGHDGECJCAAA.jjc@hpl.hp.com>

> Hmmm... can we get away with saying something like: "graphs that differ
> only in the specific literal forms used to represent the same
> values may re
> regarded as interchangeable"?  (That's a fudge, I'm trying to
> stop short of
> saying they're equal, because that imposes a burden on
> applications to know
> about the datatypes.

I quite like this fudge.

I think Patrick exagerates the extent to which one shouldn't discard
original intent. (comments do get stripped). But given the decision that the
execution of the l2v mapping is outside of RDF (which I think sounded like
the majority opinion at the telecon), we can't use c14n inside equality.

Jeremy
Received on Monday, 16 September 2002 04:39:45 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:51:00 EDT