- From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 20:51:20 +0000
- To: W3C OWL Working Group <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
It's a bit tricky...and I'm not sure if we should update the canonical parsing process or not. (First, I think it would be better to say "RDF/XML document" throughout, since a NTriples document is arguably an "RDF document".) So, in section 2.1.1, at the end: An RDF/XML document may not conform to <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/ REC-rdf-syntax-grammar-20040210/> only in respect to containing a character from a version Unicode greater than 3 and a version of XML greater than 1.0 second edition [[have to check]] but otherwise can be successfully processed. In these cases, the respective document is an xxx document in Unicode version# and XML version#. Without explicit Unicode versions, the documents default to the latest version of RDF... I would say in 2.2: ""As noted above, any conformant OWL 2 tool must accept ontology documents using the RDF/XML serialisation [OWL 2 Mapping to RDF Graphs] with Unicode 3.whateveritis and XMLwhateveritis. It *may* also accept documents with Unicode and XML versions higher than that, but it must report it?!?" Entailment doesn't change, I think. I could imagine text saying that serializers SHOULD use the version specified in the latest version of the RDF spec? I don't know, Ian, if this is enough for you to go on. Cheers, Bijan.
Received on Wednesday, 28 January 2009 20:47:55 UTC