- From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
- Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2011 14:25:09 +0000
- To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Cc: Gavin Carothers <gavin@carothers.name>, RDF Working Group WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
On 24 Nov 2011, at 08:54, Ivan Herman wrote: > Actually... my claim is that if we use the xml infoset value approach, we can keep silent on canonicalization altogether in our specs, and scrap all references to it. How two valid XML fragments could/should be compared for equality in terms of infosets is not something this WG has to solve; it is an implementation issue that has to be based on what the XML community defines. Not our job. An XSD datatype MUST define the identity and equality relations over its value space. http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema11-2/#value-space Saying “the values are XML infosets; you figure out yourself how to compare them” doesn't seem sufficient. The spec also says that you “SHOULD specify a canonical mapping for the datatype if practicable”, which means even if the value space is infosets, the spec SHOULD still say, “the canonical mapping is XC14N”. Best, Richard
Received on Thursday, 24 November 2011 14:25:38 UTC