- From: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
- Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2003 12:26:31 +0100
- To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>, dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk
- Cc: www-rdf-comments@w3.org, duerst@w3.org
At 05:27 08/08/03 -0400, Peter F. Patel-Schneider 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. I don't think that anyone has claimed this is not the case ... my understanding has always been that a C14N oracle or something is needed to do *full* RDF entailment. But for many useful applications that use RDF, such full entailment may not be required. #g --------------------------------- Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.net> Nine by Nine http://www.ninebynine.net/
Received on Tuesday, 12 August 2003 07:54:54 UTC