W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-comments@w3.org > July to September 2003

Re: [proposed close: pfps-05]

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2003 08:54:48 +0100
Message-ID: <3F3B4048.5070403@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
CC: jjc@hpl.hp.com, www-rdf-comments@w3.org, phayes@ihmc.us


> 
> Well, I certainly didn't read ``correspond'' as ``directly 1-1 encode octet
> sequences that are''.  I read ``correspond'' as ``canonicalizes to'', or
> some similar phrase.  I don't see ``1-1'' in the 28 July draft at all.
> 


In another thread, on RDF Core/I18N, we are talking about the word 
correspond in the defn of the lexical space.

I suggested the following bullet point:

[A set of Unicode strings which]

[[
   + correspond  under [UTF-8] encoding to exclusive Canonical
     XML (with comments, with empty InclusiveNamespaces
     PrefixList ) [XML-XC14N];
]]

Martin Duerst suggests:
[[
I think 'when encoded as [UTF-8]' would be slightly easier
to understand than 'under [UTF-8] encoding'.
]]

I take you to prefer not using the word 'correspond' at all, so combining

I get:

   + when encoded as [UTF-8] are exclusive Canonical
     XML (with comments, with empty InclusiveNamespaces
     PrefixList ) [XML-XC14N];

and I think that in this way we can get rid of the 'correspond' word 
throughout.

Jeremy
Received on Thursday, 14 August 2003 03:55:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 21 September 2012 14:16:32 GMT