- From: Francois Yergeau <FYergeau@alis.com>
- Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2003 17:02:22 -0400
- To: "'Brian McBride'" <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, Martin Duerst <duerst@w3.org>
- Cc: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Brian McBride wrote: > What are we to do Martin? We have an objection which in part > complains > that XML Literals don't support all of XML 1.0 since they > rule out XML > that isn't nfc. We are trying to find a way to be compatible > with the > *current* xml spec i.e. allow all of it, whilst encouraging folks to > adopt the practice I18N recommend. [Not speaking for Martin] Didn't you already give the answer to that this morning? | I think this is wrong, in that it is possible to | invent a datatype whose lexical space consists of | strings in normal form C, but whose value space | is not, that would allow the representation of | all strings. The same could be done for XML fragments,... In fact, doesn't the existing Base64 datatype do that (for strings)? -- François
Received on Thursday, 2 October 2003 17:02:37 UTC