- From: Seaborne, Andy <andy.seaborne@hp.com>
- Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2007 14:22:39 +0100
- To: Ivan Mikhailov <imikhailov@openlinksw.com>
- Cc: 'RDF Data Access Working Group' <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Ivan Mikhailov wrote: > Andy, > >> The <a> is in the default namespace of >> "http://www.w3.org/2005/sparql-results#" so it's >> {http://www.w3.org/2005/sparql-results#}a >> which is not HTML nor XHTML. > > You're right. But this does not mean that the idea is bad, it means that > you've reported a bug in Virtuoso and now I've committed a fix. No > default namespace at top levels of the result document -- no problem. Great - I pointed this out in the SOAP message - I also got an undeclared entities (&THIS;). I'll retest the SOAP protocol when this is deployed. My result format parser is namespace aware so as long as the <literal> is <x:literal> for x as http://www.w3.org/2005/sparql-results# it will all just work. It is not validating. It uses StAX and is streaming. >> 3: It can't be validated any more. > > I agree. OTOH lack of validation did not stop RDF/XML developers. > >> 4: Escaping in lexical forms is still needed > > Of course any XML output will require escaping of weird strings. But if > we require escaping of whole XML trees then double escaping of same > literal forms will be even more weird. Do you have a concrete example we can work though? My intent of using the Virtuoso example was to move the discussion from the abstract to the concrete. I thought that after escaping the XML chars < and & then that was then safe. > Now we have some about 10 implementations of SPARQL processors. We > intend to create a format that will be used worldwide by thousands of > developers. The difference in orders of magnitude means that our > personal inconveniences with adjusting implementations simply do not > matter. The maintaining the installed base is not a blocking issue for me and it's not something I mentioned in my previous message. The experience from those systems is good input into our decision though. Andy > Moreover, if an implementation writes escaped XML text it is > still OK, it's enough to be able to read unescaped XML made by others. > > Best Regards, > Ivan Mikhailov. -- Hewlett-Packard Limited Registered Office: Cain Road, Bracknell, Berks RG12 1HN Registered No: 690597 England
Received on Sunday, 23 September 2007 13:23:00 UTC