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

RE: XML observation

From: pat hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2003 14:43:58 -0500
Message-Id: <p06001264bb30cd89ee2a@[]>
To: Martin Duerst <duerst@w3.org>
Cc: <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>, w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org

>Sorry for my delay in answering over the weekend.
>And please don't remove the I18N IG mailing list address.

Sorry, my CC lists are autogenerated, something must have slipped.

>At 11:59 03/07/07 -0500, pat hayes wrote:
>>>>  - Whereas the XML conventions for real datatypes in many ways can be
>>>>     taken as just a notational convention for abstract concepts such as
>>>>     'integer' that RDF treats as abstract concepts, in the case of
>>>>     XML literals, we are dealing with marked-up text, and so there the
>>>>     abstraction we are dealing with is XML, not just the notation.
>>>>     (if RDF would want to create their own abstraction of marked-up
>>>>     text, that would be a different thing, but currently, it doesn't)
>>>Again, you seem to be presuming that if it is an XML literal, it
>>>is natural language content. That presumption unfounded.
>>In fact, the very existence of RDF/XML illustrates this. Like it or 
>>not, RDF/XML is legal XML, so can itself be enclosed in an RDF XML 
>>literal; but one would not expect that RDF/XML to inherit any 
>>attributes of the outer RDF/XML.
>Yes, you can. But that's not the primary goal of XML literals, and
>that's not what they are usually used for. Let's not design things
>so that we can make a point, but so that they are most useful for
>what they are most used for.

Well, point taken, but we really have to design the semantics so that 
they are at least internally coherent for *all* uses, not just the 
currently popular ones. If RDF only gets used for things that it is 
usually used for right now then it will have been rather a failure.

Also, I would question whether XML literals have a single primary 
goal, other than to provide for XML content. Once (if?) RDF/XML 
becomes common, this use case may well become important.

>And by the way, coming back to one of the main points, plain literals
>do inherit language information from the context (if there is such

True; that functionality was explicitly requested by one of our user 
communities who needed it for deployed large systems. We supplied it 
as requested, but with some misgivings.

>  and there is always xml:lang="" if that's not desirable,
>and on the other hand, there is no guarantee that plain literals are
>natural text.

True. In fact, they could be XML text, right?


IHMC	(850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973   home
40 South Alcaniz St.	(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola			(850)202 4440   fax
FL 32501			(850)291 0667    cell
phayes@ihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
Received on Tuesday, 8 July 2003 15:43:59 UTC

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