W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > July 2003

Re: Comment on strings and languages in RDF (rdfms-literal-is-xml-structure)

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2003 11:46:13 +0300
To: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org, duerst@w3.org
Cc: w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org, "Ralph R. Swick" <swick@w3.org>
Message-Id: <200307031146.13346.jjc@hpl.hp.com>

>   http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-xml-literal-namespaces

This is related in that the RDF Core WG, by using exclusive
canonicalization, actually cares about namespaces inherited
from (maybe far) outside the actual literal (apart from
namespaces implied by qnames in attributes and element content,
which is not RDF's fault). It seems very odd that at the same
time, inheritance of xml:lang was thrown out, even though
the later is clearly used in M&S, whereas the former is
definitely unclear in M&S.

Exc-c14n is used to decide what is locally explicit and what is not:

So, if for example there is an entity reference, this is expanded in 
accordance with exc-c14n, and hence the defn of that entity is relevant no 
matter where it was. Similarly the namespace nodes which in the infoset and 
the xpath nodeset are inherited, are locally explicit going by the rules of 
exc-c14n, i.e. if the namespace prefix is visibly used. 

The behaviour here is essentially local


locally uses the binding of the eg prefix, and that's why the namespace node 
is relevant and the binding will explicitly appear in the corresponding 
XMLLiteral. This sort of behaviour is necessary to cope with the mathml 
example in M&S. The WG could have decided that the MathML example was simply 
wrong, but as it is we found a design that worked for that example.

As for not including the xml:lang, we are simply following exc-c14n. I would 
suggest looking at their documents for the rationale for that decision.

Received on Thursday, 3 July 2003 05:46:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:54:06 UTC