Re: review of rdf:text

I see your point.

At the moment, I left an editor's note in the beginning of section 4, 
pointing to your mail.

Thanks for the comment,
Axel

Felix Sasaki wrote:
> Axel Polleres さんは書きました:
>>
>> Felix:
>>
>> Good point! Note that op: is not meant to be used as a prefix and has 
>> no namespace assigned.
> 
> you are right. See also 
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/REC-xpath-functions-20070123/#namespace-prefixes
> "Functions defined with the |op| prefix are described here to underpin 
> the definitions of the operators in [XML Path Language (XPath) 2.0] 
> <http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/REC-xpath-functions-20070123/#xpath20>, 
> [XQuery 1.0: An XML Query Language] 
> <http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/REC-xpath-functions-20070123/#xquery> and 
> [XSL Transformations (XSLT) Version 2.0] 
> <http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/REC-xpath-functions-20070123/#xslt20>. These 
> functions are not available directly to users, and there is no 
> requirement that implementations should actually provide these 
> functions. For this reason, no namespace is associated with the |op| 
> prefix. For example, multiplication is generally associated with the |*| 
> operator, but it is described as a function in this document:"
> 
>>
>> I removed op:text-equal completely, since the "eq" operator is anyway 
>> backed up by fn:text-compare.
>>
>> Instead, I added in the description of fn:compare:
>>
>> "
>> This function, invoked with the first signature, backs up the "eq", 
>> "ne", "gt", "lt", "le" and "ge" operators on text values."
>>
>>
>> As for reusing the fn: namespace ... that is basically the same issue 
>> as with using the rdf: namespace for rdf:text... so, I see no reason 
>> why we shouldn't reuse the fn: namespace here, since the definitions 
>> here truly extend XML datatypes and the related XPath/Xquery functions.
> 
> A theoretical or political reason: your examples look like XQuery , but 
> they are not part of the functions defined for XQuery 1.0 / XPath 2.0 
> fo. IMO you should talk to the XQuery WG to make sure that they approve 
> your approch of using their namespace - if you haven't done that already?
> 
> A practical reason: all implementations of XQuery 1.0 will break with 
> your approach. Using a different prefix, however, and an implementation 
> of your functions with the already existing means of user defined 
> functions, would make life easier for these implementations. E.g.
> 
> myfn:text-from-string ( $arg as xs:string) as rdf:text
> 
> Well, you might need to cheat for the return type rdf:text, but at least 
> this could build a bridge the existing implementations ...
> 
> Felix
> 
>>
>> Comments welcome!
>>
>> Axel
>>
>>
>>
>> Felix Sasaki wrote:
>>>
>>> A comment on examples like the following:
>>>
>>> declare function op:text-equal( $comparand1 as rdf:text, $comparand2 
>>> as rdf:text ) as xs:boolean
>>> {
>>> return
>>> if ( fn:compare ( fn:lang-from-text( $comparand1 ), 
>>> fn:lang-from-text( $comparand2 ) ) = 0 &&
>>> fn:compare ( fn:string-from-text( $comparand1 ) , 
>>> fn:string-from-text( $comparand2 ) = 0 )
>>> then fn:true()
>>> else fn:false()
>>> }
>>>
>>> op:text-equal, fn:lang-from-text, fn:string-from-text are not part of 
>>> the XQuery functions namespace
>>> |http://www.w3.org/2005/xpath-functions
>>> so I'd propose to identify these with different prefixes in your 
>>> examples, and use fn: only for native XQuery functions.
>>>
>>> Felix
>>> |
>>> Axel Polleres さんは書きました:
>>>>
>>>> Hmmm, my changes weren't saved... maybe a connection problem, redid 
>>>> them now.
>>>>
>>>> Axel Polleres wrote:
>>>>> Phillips, Addison wrote:
>>>>>>> This document is in good shape and is ready to be published.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A minor nit: the document has a dead reference to RFC 4646 which 
>>>>>> should be removed (the document correctly references BCP 47 
>>>>>> instead, which is currently the same thing).
>>>>>
>>>>> fixed.
>>>>>
>>>>>> I18N Core WG would like some credit on this document as well :-). 
>>>>>> Perhaps an acknowledgement?
>>>>>
>>>>> Added:
>>>>> "This is an editors' draft being developed jointly by the RIF and 
>>>>> OWL WGs with support of the I18N Core WG."
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Important: The two characters use to delimit rdf:text values in the
>>>>>>> page don't
>>>>>>> render in my browser (firefox, windows). I also checked explorer
>>>>>>> on my machine
>>>>>>> and they do not render there.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The two characters are both entities (&lang; and &rang;) which are 
>>>>>> U+27E8 and U+27E9 respectively. See [1]. These are fairly uncommon 
>>>>>> characters that look a lot like parentheses.
>>>>>
>>>>> replced by parentheses for the data values, but not for the 
>>>>> facets... I wonder why we have < f v > (without comma) for the 
>>>>> facet pairs and
>>>>> ( s,l ) (with comma) for the data value pairs.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Section 3: Why aren't there parallel versions of the length
>>>>>>> functions for lang tags?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Length functions have no practical meaning with language tags, 
>>>>>> whereas they are a useful property of strings.
>>>>>
>>>>> answered already earlier along the same lines, I agree.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Kind Regards,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Addison
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Addison Phillips
>>>>>> Globalization Architect -- Lab126
>>>>>> Chair -- W3C Internationalization Core WG
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Internationalization is not a feature.
>>>>>> It is an architecture.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [1] http://www.w3.org/2003/entities/2007doc/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
> 


-- 
Dr. Axel Polleres
Digital Enterprise Research Institute, National University of Ireland, 
Galway
email: axel.polleres@deri.org  url: http://www.polleres.net/

Received on Wednesday, 12 November 2008 01:40:46 UTC