- From: Philip Taylor <pjt47@cam.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 09 Feb 2010 09:15:03 +0000
- To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- CC: public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>
Dan Connolly wrote: > [...] > I consider the XMLLiteral problems limitations of the test > harness; I suggest more subtle SPARQL queries. I don't recommend > a strict canonical-xml requirement on RDFa parsers; I hope > we can find some equivalence test from XQuery that will serve > better. The exclusive Canonical XML requirement is a feature of RDF, not RDFa. http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-concepts/#dfn-rdf-XMLLiteral says: "The lexical space is the set of all strings [...] for which encoding as UTF-8 [RFC 2279] yields exclusive Canonical XML (with comments, with empty InclusiveNamespaces PrefixList) [XML-XC14N]" so if an RDF producer (e.g. an RDFa parser) produces an RDF triple whose object is a typed literal with datatype rdf:XMLLiteral and with a lexical form that is *not* in exclusive canonical form, then it is not conforming RDF, and I would expect a test suite for an RDF-based technology to flag it as an error. Until/unless RDF changes the definition of rdf:XMLLiteral, I don't believe RDFa has any choice in this. -- Philip Taylor pjt47@cam.ac.uk
Received on Tuesday, 9 February 2010 09:15:32 UTC