- From: Alex Milowski <alex@milowski.com>
- Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2012 17:13:36 -0700
- To: W3C RDFWA WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 6:07 PM, Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net> wrote: > On Apr 27, 2012, at 5:35 PM, Alex Milowski wrote: > >> Then the sparql is wrong? I know my implementation is handling an >> empty safe curie incorrectly but it looks to me like the correct >> expansion is nothing. As such, you shouldn't get any triples. > > No, typically if you see four processors all passing a test, the test isn't going to be too wrong. > > In this case, the @about=[] and @resource=[] don't generate IRIs, so they're ignored. The subject is set in the first <p> and is in place for dc:title and dc:contributor. The test is to make sure that an empty CURIE doesn't set the subject or object. I think there is a potential problem in 5.1 that is demonstrated by this test case. The @about=[] resolves to nothing (empty CURIE). As such, no new subject is established if you read the text literally: * by using the resource from @about, if present, obtained according to the section on CURIE and IRI Processing; * otherwise, if the element is the root element of the document, then act as if there is an empty @about present, and process it according to the rule for @about, above; * otherwise, if parent object is present, new subject is set to the value of parent object. Does that "if present" clause mean: A. if the attribute 'about' is present or B. if a resource is present identified by the resolved value of the "about" attribute. ? For this test case to be correct, it must be (B). -- --Alex Milowski "The excellence of grammar as a guide is proportional to the paucity of the inflexions, i.e. to the degree of analysis effected by the language considered." Bertrand Russell in a footnote of Principles of Mathematics
Received on Tuesday, 1 May 2012 00:14:05 UTC