Re: Help with link? (Was: Re: reminder: outstanding recent actions)

At 14:58 13/12/2002 -0600, pat hayes wrote:
>>2002-11-22#1  janG  ensure test cases themselves are named using frag IDs
>>
>>2002-11-22#2  jang  [test case fix] remove RDFS entailment rules from the 
>>language-ignored-for-numeric-types cases.
>>
>>2002-11-22#3  patH  Tie MT datatype to the sec that points out language 
>>isn't important to DT entailment (except for rdf:XMLLiteral)
>
>Ive added the following paragraph to the section on datatype 
>interpretations in the Semantics doc.  (I realized that the current text 
>was not actually accurate, since it said that the generic datatype 
>conditions applied to rdf:XMLLiteral as well as all the others, so Ive 
>tweaked that.)
>
>Now, further to the above, what exactly should I link it to???

If Jeremy responds in time, take his word for it, but in the absence of 
that I'd link to:
   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2002Dec/att-0053/00-rc#dfn-datatype-mapping

which isn't exactly right, but the closest.  I'd also put an @@ on it to 
confirm.


>--------
>
>The semantic conditions for the built-in datatype rdf:XMLLiteral have been 
>described in previous sections; but in a datatyped interpretation, in 
>addition, a graph which contains a literal with a non-well-formed XML 
>string or an illegal language tag, and which is typed with rdf:XMLLiteral 
>is always considered a datatype violation. These semantic conditions are 
>exactly similar to [those for other datatypes] if one defines the lexical 
>space of rdf:XMLLiteral  as the set all XML documents and all pairs of XML 
>documents and language tags, and L2V(I(rdf:XMLLiteral)) as XML 
>canonicalization. The possible inclusion of language tags makes this a 
>special case, however: in all other cases, RDF ignores any language tags 
>which occur in typed literals.

Looks good but I don't believe I'm a competent judge in this area.

Brian

Received on Friday, 13 December 2002 16:41:05 UTC