W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > December 2002

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

From: Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org>
Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 13:10:08 +0000
Message-Id: <>
To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Cc: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>, jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org

At 09:42 PM 12/13/02 +0000, Brian McBride wrote:

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

Referring to:

Also refer to the definition of D-interpretation later in the same section, 
and the subsequent explanatory paragraphs?  My my mind, that's the bit the 
primarily defines the semantic conditions for datatyped literals.


>>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.

Graham Klyne
Received on Sunday, 15 December 2002 05:57:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:24:19 UTC