- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2001 22:13:30 +0100
- To: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <3BC4B9FA.9A930845@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
DanC: > I suppose, in addition to the tests art came up with, > there's an example in the RDF spec: <rdf:Description xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/metadata/dublin_core#" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-mathml" rdf:about="http://mycorp.com/papers/NobelPaper1"> <dc:Title rdf:parseType="Literal"> Ramifications of <apply> <power/> <apply> <plus/> <ci>a</ci> <ci>b</ci> </apply> <cn>2</cn> </apply> to World Peace </dc:Title> <dc:Creator>David Hume</dc:Creator> </rdf:Description> -- http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-rdf-syntax-19990222/#examples > Jeremy, as owner of #rdfms-literal-is-xml-structure, I'd like > you to show what the n-triples form of that document should be. I would not be opposed to deleting parseType="Literal" The only use case I have been told about is for cheap and cheerful tools which involving typing RDF in directly where people want to put some HTML in a value. <rdf:Description> <rdf:value rdf:parseType="Literal">I <EM>did</EM> tell you</rdf:value> </rdf:Description> In my previous ramblings on the topic, which I still owe the WG a second attempt at, I have suggested that: 1) any reasonable attempt at representing an XML Literal should be permissable. 2) we should recommend an XML Canonicalisation according to the fragment section of that spec. http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-xml-c14n-20010315#DocSubsets Taking your challenge and following 2, I attach an n-triples file. The literal, (in pieces that need to be concatenated is) "\n Ramifications of\n <apply xmlns=\"http://www" ".w3.org/TR/REC-mathml\" xmlns:dc=\"http://purl.org/metadata/d" "ublin_core#\" xmlns:rdf=\"http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-sy" "ntax-ns#\">\n <power></power>\n <apply>\n " " <plus></plus>\n <ci>a</ci>\n <ci>b</ci>" "\n </apply>\n <cn>2</cn>\n </apply>\n " " to World Peace\n " Notes: Alla c14n all namespaces are made explicit on the outermost element(s) in the fragment. In this case there is one. The namespaces are listed in lexicographic order of the namespace prefix. Empty xml elements such as <power/> are canonicalised to <power></power>. The bit I don't like is including the irrelevant namespaces rdf and dc as well as the relevant default namespace. Unfortunately the XML guys have made it impossible to distinguish the relevant namespaces from the irrelevant. Moreover it's not possible to undeclare namespaces (other than the default one); hence it is always the case that XML Literals under my proposal will have the rdf namespace being explicit in them (yuk!). I am increasingly convinced that infoset is an irrelevance to RDF/XML and we should only consider the XPath nodeset. I would much prefer to drop parseType="Literal" than have a homebrew solution that did not strike a chord with some XML standard. Jeremy
Attachments
- application/x-unknown-content-type-nt_auto_file attachment: hume.nt
Received on Wednesday, 10 October 2001 17:08:57 UTC