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

Re: RDF model theory is now underspecified

From: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 19:26:08 +0100
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Cc: www-rdf-comments@w3.org
Message-Id: <20030818192608.14d64b68.dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>

Since this is a question on the syntax draft, and not RDF Semantics
at all, I'll reply.

On Mon, 18 Aug 2003 12:24:31 -0400 (EDT) "Peter F. Patel-Schneider"
<pfps@research.bell-labs.com> wrote:
> The current editor's draft of RDF Syntax
> (http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/TR/WD-rdf-syntax-grammar-20030117/
> dated 18 August 2003) contains the following new wording in a
> normative note within Section 6.1.9
>   During input processing of XML Schema Datatypes within RDF,
>   software MAY apply the appropriate whitespace normalization
>   immediately before the lexical to value mapping, and MAY produce a
>   warning if any whitespace is changed in this normalization.

Read the document and the references to find out what MAY means.

This is also pretty much what the editor's draft of RDF concepts says
on the matter, reworded to apply to the syntax data model mapping.

> Although ``input processing ... immediately before the lexical to
> value mapping'' is not particularly well defined, I take this to mean
> that the RDF Graph corresponding to

You give no specific problem with that phrase.
> <rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
>          xmlns:eg="http://example.org/">
>   <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://www.example.org/a">
>     <eg:prop rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#int"> 3
>     </eg:prop>
>   </rdf:Description>
> </rdf:RDF>
> remains unchanged as 
> <http://www.example.org/a> <http://example.org/prop> " 3
> "^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#int> .

> However, it appears to me that this note means that the RDF model
> theory is now underspecified, as RDF software, including software that
> computes entailments, may choose to treat 
> 	" 3 "^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#int> 
> as denoting the integer three instead of some non-literal.  
> I view this change as undesirable.

We had several implementor feedback reports on this point and made
this change to reflect the reality of running code for XML schema
datatypes.   Implementors now MAY make that entailment above.

The RDF Semantics document is not underspecified here, particularly
since the running code we have had feedback on, implements it.

Received on Monday, 18 August 2003 14:30:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:15:21 UTC