Re: support XML Literals in RDF

Hello Peter,

It seems to me that the best way to implement such an oracle is
to have a special-purpose bit with each literal in a triple store.
The bit would be either off (when the datatype is unknown or not
yet checked) or on (when the datatype is checked and conforms).
When the triple store is filled by parsing RDF/XML, the bit can
be set automatically. In other cases, it will have to be checked.
One easy way to do so would be to write the relevant triples out
to RDF/XML and read them back in (with some appropriate logic
to make sure one knows which literals are affected).

So in terms of computation, it should not be a big deal, because
it can be done once.

Regards,    Martin.

At 05:27 03/08/08 -0400, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
>From: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
>Subject: Re: support XML Literals in RDF (was Re: Test cases: XML Literal 
>value space and exclusive canonicalization)
>Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2003 12:22:00 +0100
>
> > On Thu, 07 Aug 2003 07:02:52 -0400
> > "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com> wrote:
>
>[...]
>
> > > Although any RDF-only application, i.e., an application that *only*
> > > needs to determine the RDF implications of an RDF graph, does not need
> > > any special code to support XML Literals beyond the code needed to
> > > support sequences of octets, an RDF application that goes beyond these
> > > implications, for example to determine whether a literal is in LV, will
> > > need considerable code to support XML Literals.
>
>I was wrong.
>
>Even rdf-entailment requires access to an oracle to determine whether an
>octet-sequence is in canonical form.  Rule rdf2 requires access to such an
>oracle.
>
>
>[...]
>
>Peter F. Patel-Schneider
>Bell Labs Research
>Lucent Technologies

Received on Friday, 8 August 2003 16:21:00 UTC