W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webont-wg@w3.org > July 2003

Fwd: RDF XMLLiterals reagle-01,-02

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 10:58:00 +0300
To: www-webont-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <200307021058.00943.jjc@hpl.hp.com>


In another role, I've just sent this message to Jim, concerning XMLLiterals in 
RDF, and the webont last call comment.

I believe this is now ready for WebOnt to respond.

Personal comment:
There is current conflict between RDF Core and I18N about whether XMLLiterals 
should or should not have language tags from the outer scope e.g.

<rdf:Description xml:lang="it">
  <eg:prop rdf:parseType="Literal">
 ho detto, <em>mammamia</em>
  <eg:prop>
</rdf:Description>

RDF Core's recent decisions do not include the xml:lang="it" on the 
xmlliteral, so there is no indication that ho detto mamamia is italian.  The 
desired effect should be written more like:

<rdf:Description>
  <eg:prop rdf:parseType="Literal">
<span xml:lang="it"> ho detto, <em>mammamia</em>
</span>
  <eg:prop>
</rdf:Description>

It would, at least IMO, be helpful if webont specifically commented on this 
point of contention. (If we have an opinion)

Jeremy


----------  Forwarded Message  ----------

Subject: RDF XMLLiterals reagle-01,-02
Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 10:50:11 +0300
From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
To: www-rdf-comments@w3.org, eric@w3.org, reagle@w3.org, hendler@cs.umd.edu

You earlier commented on the RDF Core Last Call working drafts, particularly
on the design of XMLLiterals.

This message concerns those comments, listed as:
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#reagle-01
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#reagle-02
and
also
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0434
"Confusion about wrapping of XMLLiteral"
which did not get an issue number assigned.

We have modifed the decisions reflected in our earlier reply:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003AprJun/0021

While contemplating various last call issues RDF Core WG has simplified the
design of typed literals, particularly XMLLiteral, by removing the language
tag.

This permits addressing:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0434
"Confusion about wrapping of XMLLiteral" by simply removing the wrapper
altogether.

The resolution to modify the design was decided on 09th May 2003
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003May/0138.html
and reads:
RESOLVED: Typed literals option 4 from msg 0086

which refers to
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003May/0086
[[

> Option 4:
> Language tag is simply dropped from all typed literals including
> rdf:XMLLiteral

PROPOSE
  Concepts is changed to say that a literal can have either a datatype or a
language tag and not both.
  rdf:XMLLiteral datatype is changed to have the identity as its lexical
value mapping (no wrapping), with consequential change to the value space of
rdf:XMLLiteral.
  Other editors to make consequential changes.
]]
we further clarified (20th June) that "the identity" was over-simplistic, and
the value space remains a set of exclusively canonicalized XML,
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Jun/0156.html

The new text defining XML Literal can be found in the editors draft at:
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/TR/WD-rdf-concepts-20030117/#section-XMLLit
eral


Please note that the I18N-WG have made a comment criticizing this decision:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Jun/0023.html
which the RDF Core has not officially yet agreed a response (although we have
spent more than an hour of telecon time on it, with still a majority opposing
further changes).

I will update you on any further changes (well I hope not!).

Please let us know, copying www-rdf-comments@w3.org if:
Joe:
- these changes make the previously confusing decisions acceptable
- if you find these changes address
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0434
"Confusion about wrapping of XMLLiteral"
in an acceptable fashion

Eric, WebOnt:
- if we have acceptably addressed your comments:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0240
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0335

Jeremy

-------------------------------------------------------
Received on Wednesday, 2 July 2003 04:58:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:01 GMT