- From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 17:39:54 +0200
- To: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
- Cc: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>, Guus Schreiber <guus.schreiber@vu.nl>, RDF WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
On May 18, 2012, at 14:09 , Steve Harris wrote: > On 2012-05-18, at 12:42, Ivan Herman wrote: > >> >> On May 18, 2012, at 13:16 , Steve Harris wrote: >> >>> On 2012-05-17, at 19:42, Richard Cyganiak wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Steve, >>>> >>>> On 17 May 2012, at 16:48, Steve Harris wrote: >>>>>> I have hit a problem today, when implementing the HTML literal in my RDFa distiller software. The problem is that the underlying library does not give me a method whereby I can take the original file's element content from its corresponding DOM node and dump it into a string (that can be used for the RDF Literal). (Technically, the library does not implement the innerHTML attribute on the DOM Element Node.) I can only take the content and dump it into a string in full XML syntax. >>>>>> >>>>>> So, for example, if I have, in HTML5+RDFa: >>>>>> >>>>>> <div property="ex:something" datatype="rdf:HTML"><p>Inner</div> >>>>>> >>>>>> then the only way I can generate an HTML Literal is >>>>>> >>>>>> <> ex:something "<p>Inner</p>"^^rdf:HTML . >>>>>> >>>>>> Another library used by another tool may have the necessary method. For the same RDFa fragment it can generate: >>>>>> >>>>>> <> ex:something "<p>Inner"^^rdf:HTML . >>>>>> >>>>>> With the current definition of the HTML Literal both RDFa tools are correct and compliant: the HTML Literals, though lexically different, are identical in terms of the generated DOM, based on the HTML5 specification. Ie, if a triple store implements the identity in the value space, there would be no duplication of triples if both tools dump their content into the same space. If only lexical identity is available then... it becomes messy. >>>>> >>>>> Sure, but what usecase do you have for being able to want to compare these - even though though lexically different - semantically? >>>> >>>> Test suites for HTML5+RDFa parsers. >>> >>> Surely there you'd "just" need a graph isomorphism test? You don't care if the input documents are semantically equivalent? >> >> You do care in the test suite whether the generated Graph is what is intended, ie, that the right literals are generated. The case above shows that this goes beyond graph isomorphism. > > Ah, I see, yes. > > That would be equally satisfied by a SPARQL function though, no? I am not sure I understand what you say. Any such function should rely on the comparison of such literals. I.e., we have to have a clear definition for this comparison because the purely lexical comparison does not cut it. This is exactly what Richard and I proposed to have... Ivan > > - Steve > > >> Ivan >> >>> >>> - Steve >>> >>> -- >>> Steve Harris, CTO >>> Garlik, a part of Experian >>> 1-3 Halford Road, Richmond, TW10 6AW, UK >>> +44 20 8439 8203 http://www.garlik.com/ >>> Registered in England and Wales 653331 VAT # 887 1335 93 >>> Registered office: Landmark House, Experian Way, Nottingham, Notts, NG80 1ZZ >>> >> >> >> ---- >> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead >> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ >> mobile: +31-641044153 >> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf >> >> >> >> >> >> > > -- > Steve Harris, CTO > Garlik, a part of Experian > 1-3 Halford Road, Richmond, TW10 6AW, UK > +44 20 8439 8203 http://www.garlik.com/ > Registered in England and Wales 653331 VAT # 887 1335 93 > Registered office: Landmark House, Experian Way, Nottingham, Notts, NG80 1ZZ > > ---- Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ mobile: +31-641044153 FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
Received on Friday, 18 May 2012 15:36:37 UTC