- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 17:00:49 +0100
- To: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
- Cc: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Peter is unhappy with the lack of decisiveness in the whitespace processing. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JulSep/0269.html I note that WebOnt backed a similar comment, saying: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0335.html "OWL necessitates that the denotation in the domain of discourse be fully defined by the source RDF/XML file. " This might suggest that Peter could, if he chose, get WebOnt support for his comments above. A different way of coping with the implementors' feedback would have been to have added the whiteSpace normalization to the l2v mapping within RDF datatyping. This would have avoided the MAYs and SHOULDs that cause the implementation variability. I confess to being worn out with this - but if anyone could suggests words I guess I would support them. (Dave made a valiant attempt to head this criticism off - but I think Peter concern follows from almost any MAY in our spec) Jeremy
Received on Saturday, 23 August 2003 01:39:28 UTC