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

open concepts issues - proposals for xmlsch-05 and xsmlsch-06

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 13:14:56 +0300
To: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <200305141314.56046.jjc@hpl.hp.com>


The issue list
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/

shows 6 open concepts issues

of which tex-01 xmlsch-01 xmlsch-02 were closed on Friday

and

I have made proposals on
danc-02 goofy literals
however they are now out of date given our literals decision.

I will make a new proposal, but probably not in time for the telecon - it will 
be:
<<<
PROPOSE
Accept danc-02.
Our design of literals was a bit goofy, and we have changed it:
[[
**new text still to be written in light of typed literals decision**
**sorry for not hurrying here, but I am trying to be very careful**
]]
Moreover, we believe some of the concern was to do with the denotation of 
literals in the domain of discourse. To avoid copying any goofiness in the 
abstract syntax into the domain of discourse,
we have hence changed the following rule in rdf-mt:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-rdf-mt-20030123/#gddenot
From
"if E is a plain literal then I(E) = E"
to
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/TR/WD-rdf-mt-20030117/#gddenot
"if E is a plain literal "aaa" then I(E) = aaa"
"if E is a plain literal "aaa"@ttt then I(E) = <aaa, ttt>"

The textual gloss is:
"Plain literals, without embedded datatypes, are always interpreted as 
referring to themselves: either a character string or a pair consisting of 
two character strings."

The informative text in concepts:
"As recommended in the RDF formal semantics [RDF-SEMANTICS], these plain 
literals are self-denoting."
is unchanged.
>>>

xmlsch-05
character sequences
[[
Since "string" is used as the local name for a particular simple type
    in the XML Schema namespace, we believe it will be less confusing for
    users, in the long run, if the lexical representations of
    simple-datatype values are described not as "strings" but as
    "character sequences".
]]

PROPOSE: to not accept this comment.
Rationale:
It feels like a fairly extensive editorial change. Also in the semantic web 
activity documents xsd:string is always refered to in its qualified form, and 
so the possible confusion is diminsihed.


xmlsch-06
natural language data
[[
A plain literal is a string combined with an optional language
        identifier. This should be used for plain text in a natural
        language. As recommended in the RDF formal semantics
        [RDF-SEMANTICS], these plain literals are self-denoting.
]]

The xmlsch wg rightly picked out a bug - I believe the intent of the should 
was to say that when you use this syntax then it should be for this purpose. 
They read it as when you want to achieve this purpose then you should use 
this syntax.

PROPOSE to accept; with rewording (added 'not' and 'except for')

[[
A plain literal is a string combined with an optional language
        identifier. This should not be used except for plain text 
        in a natural language. As recommended in the RDF formal semantics
        [RDF-SEMANTICS], these plain literals are self-denoting.
]]

(Note this an informative "should not", not a normative "SHOULD NOT")

Summary:
6 issues shown open, 3 already closed, 2 proposals to close above, 1 proposal 
to close missing text to be crafted.



Jeremy
Received on Wednesday, 14 May 2003 07:14:53 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:57:30 EDT