- From: Martin Duerst <duerst@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 02 Aug 2003 11:30:13 -0400
- To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: rdf core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>, i18n <w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org>
At 22:49 03/07/31 +0100, Brian McBride wrote: >Martin Duerst wrote: > >[...] > >> >>We can always record any kind of information in the graph. But the >>problem there is that different people/applications will do this >>differently. > >I don't think that's a problem in this use case, as it is defined. Do >you want to have a go at refining the use case to illustrate the problem >you see? Hello Brian, I think this discussion about use cases is very useful, and is helping us a lot advancing our common understanding. Rather than refining the use case, let me extend it. Assume that the RDF created by scraping all kinds of <title>-like elements from all kinds of document formats is viewed in some kind of RDF tool. This tool may use language information to disambiguate glyph shapes, or it may use language information to appropriately speak the texts to users with disabilities. If there is a clearly defined and uniform way to have language information for XML literals, then that can easily be done. Otherwise, this informations is most probably just ignored. Please note that for my extension of the use case, it would be enough to have xml:lang on a <dummy> element internal to the XML Literal. But that, as we have discussed, does not work for the original part of the use case, where we were concerned with markup integrity. We can solve half of the use case with one solution, and the other half with the other solution, but the solutions are different and so don't work together. Regards, Martin.
Received on Saturday, 2 August 2003 11:43:48 UTC