- From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2003 15:16:12 +0100
- To: Martin Duerst <duerst@w3.org>
- CC: rdf core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>, i18n <w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org>
Martin Duerst wrote: > At 22:49 03/07/31 +0100, Brian McBride wrote: [...] > Hello Brian, > > I think this discussion about use cases is very useful, > and is helping us a lot advancing our common understanding. In that case it must be doing you more good than me. > > 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. I'm still at the point of looking for a use case to demonstrate that markup integrity is a real problem. You suggested that your issue has to do with multiple users doing the same thing differently and I asked you to refine the use case we have been discussing to better illustrate your issue. I don't see how this use case illustrates a problem with markup integrity; rather it assumes that problem. Brian
Received on Monday, 4 August 2003 10:17:03 UTC