W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-comments@w3.org > April to June 2005

Re: Error in RDF/XML Syntax Specification?

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2005 13:46:18 -0400
To: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
Cc: Arjohn Kampman <arjohn.kampman@aduna.biz>, Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>, www-rdf-comments@w3.org
Message-ID: <20050405174618.GI20055@homer.w3.org>

New version: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/errata#rdf-syntax-grammar

Incorporating Graham's qualifier, a typo fix from Pat Hayes, and a
closing observation I could do with someone reviewing (tried to 
interpret Dave's IRC comment that this was really 2 issues...):
[[
Serialization of datatyped empty literals is not anticipated by the
RDF/XML grammar.

This is believed by several developers and former WG-members to be an
omission in the grammar defined by the RDF/XML Syntax Specification: a
bug was reported (and acknowledged by the editor), relating to the use
of an rdf:datatype attribute on empty RDF properties. See the archived
mailing list thread for technical details. In addition to the question
of the RDF/XML grammar's syntactic completeness, note that this issue
identifies a construct that occurs within RDF graphs that cannot be
serialized in the RDF/XML syntax. 
]]

Is that last claim right? Is there a difference btw between

<foo:prop rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string"
	></foo:prop>

...versus:

	<foo:prop rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string"/>

...in terms of this issue and the grammar productions?

Dan
Received on Tuesday, 5 April 2005 17:46:19 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 21 September 2012 14:16:34 GMT