W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > March 2002

Re: parseType˙2literal"

From: <tarod@softhome.net>
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 09:57:42 GMT
Message-ID: <20020311095742.28838.qmail@softhome.net>
To: "Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org

  I used jena, and for the example I send I used the validator in w3c page,
so, as you correctly guessed is ARP.

  One expected that the parser doesn't modify the literal. If I add a valid
XML, I expect to get the same String when I read it (at least the same
XML). Why rdf parser should modifiy it? What's the use of this literal in
RDF? I just wanted to keep it as information (we will use CDATA by now).

  The problem it's when I serialize the object and read the serialization,
it doesn't work because of the changes (for instance two namespaces with
the same name inside the same element window, doesn't work)

  Thanks,
         Marc

Jeremy Carroll writes:

> 
> Nice example.
> 
> It's a bug.
> It's a bug with the spec (M&S); well not really a bug, M&S is deliberately
> and consciously vague.
> It's a bug with the implementation (was that ARP?).
> 
> I am very pleased to see an example with processing instructions in.
> 
> The WG is currently working on specifying the bahaviour more clearly.
> 
> I'll add some in-line comments ...
> 
> >
> >   <tp:representacionXul rdf:parseType="Literal">
> >       <?xml-stylesheet href="/sistema-acceso/css/bindings.css"
> >                        type="text/css"?>
> >       <?xul-overlay href="/sistema-acceso/xul/c4d_common.xul"?>
> Those processing instructions are difficult.
> An XML based processor will prcoess them through a different path than most
> of the rest of XML content.
> I think some processing instructions might be expected to be processed
> before RDF processing, whereas these want to wait until after RDF
> processing.
> 
> >       <xul:window id="Simulacion"
> >                   title="Pantalla de Simulación"
> > xmlns="http://www.mozilla.org/keymaster/gatekeeper/there.is.onl
> > y.xul"
> > xmlns:xul="http://www.mozilla.org/keymaster/gatekeeper/there.is.only.xul"
> > xmlns:c4d="http://www.isegware.com/rdfs/au/c4d.rdfs">
> >                 <vbox></vbox>
> >       </xul:window>
> >   </tp:representacionXul>
> >
> >    so, why this is converted to this?
> >    <tp:representacionXul rdf:parseType='Literal'>
> >       	<xul:window
> > xmlns:xul="http://www.mozilla.org/keymaster/gatekeeper/there.is.on
> > ly.xul"
> >
> > xmlns="http://www.mozilla.org/keymaster/gatekeeper/there.is.only.xul"
> > id="Simulacion"
> 
> Reordering of attributes is permitted because it is XML.
> The algorithm seems to be:
>  - the element has visibly used the xul namespace, so let's declare it.
>  - the next attribute uses the default namespace, so let's declare it.
> > xmlns="http://www.mozilla.org/keymaster/gatekeeper/there.is.only.xul"
> Repeating this default namespace declaration is an error.
>  - the element has visibly used the xul namespace, so let's declare it.
> 
> > title="Pantalla de Simulación">
> >   	   <vbox
> 
> Repeating the namespace declaration is unnecessary, but not IMO wrong.
> M&S does not specify.
> Repeating the namespace declaration changes the XML Infoset but does not
> change the XPath nodeset.
> 
> > xmlns="http://www.mozilla.org/keymaster/gatekeeper/there.is.only.xul">
> >            </vbox>
> 
> Have you transcribed this into e-mail incorrectly: the whitespace element
> content of the vbox element is wrong. It is not the sort of bug I would
> expect.
> 
> >         </xul:window>
> >    </tp:representacionXul>
> >
> >    Anybody knows why???
> 
> FIX: wait a few weeks for the WG to determine what the "correct" behaviour
> should be, wait a few weeks (or months) more for your implementor (me?) to
> fix it.
> (Was that really ARP? It's worse than I expected :( .)
> 
> >    Thanks,
> >           Marc
> >
> >
> 
Received on Tuesday, 12 March 2002 00:36:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:53 GMT