W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > February 2004

[closed] Re: Small cwm patch: fixing embedded RDF

From: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>
Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 22:25:51 -0500
Message-Id: <23CAB344-6B30-11D8-B007-000A9580D8C0@w3.org>
Cc: Public W3C <www-archive@w3.org>
To: Andrew Kuchling <akuchlin@mems-exchange.org>


In http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2002Sep/0119.html
(ages ago!)

From: Andrew Kuchling <akuchlin@mems-exchange.org>
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2002 14:09:15 -0400 (EDT)
To: timbl@w3.org, connolly@w3.org, www-archive+n3bugs@w3.org
Message-Id: <E17pBv1-0000uh-00@ute.mems-exchange.org>

You wrote

"""If you have RDF embedded in some larger XML document, cwm's rdf 
raises an "Unknown RDF parser state 'Not RDF' in end tag" exception.
For example, this little file won't be processed.

<?xml version="1.0"?>
<metadata  xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
   <title>  This is non-RDF content </title>
     <rdf:Description rdf:about="%s">
   <element />

The patch is simple, just ignoring the NOT_RDF state in the end
tag handler; see below.


I'm clearing up the bug archives, better laet than never.  This one, in 
the current cwm at least, does not give an error, but does ignore the 
RDF.  This is deliberate: it has no authority to parse the RDF data 
embedded in the <metadata> tags.  That depends on the semantics of the 
<metadata> namespace.

Note that the GRDDL work provides a way to authorize an RDF engine to 
extract RDF from XML documents, and if that seems to gain acceptance I 
would be inclined to include it in cwm.

Received on Sunday, 29 February 2004 22:25:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:42:36 UTC