- From: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
- Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 14:29:33 +0000
- To: w3c-rdfcore-wg <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
- cc: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
>>>Jeremy Carroll said:
> (Another resend - I've had some problems)
<snip/>
> we still have to decide that, ....
>
> Dave:
> > xml("<b>foo</b>") XML content, no language
> what about xml("<b >foo</b>") is this:
> a) not legal ntriple
> b) legal but different from xml("<b>foo</b>") (and not representable in
> RDF/XML?)
> c) legal and the same as xml("<b>foo</b>")
As you know, NTriples doesn't define equality, it is a syntax for the
Model Theory to use to do so. So: the Q is, how should the MT define
equality on these?
> Personally I prefer (c), but I think it is better for the group to not make
> this decision until after we have completed the xml literal issues.
Can't be (a) since the "" content is just a sequence of characters.
(b) and (c) cannot be distinguished; it is a legal sequence of
ntriple characters.
> For our test cases I think we can choose appropriate canonical strings, so
> this needn't slow us down at all.
Exactly
Dave
Received on Monday, 11 March 2002 09:29:36 UTC