link and definition needed

Guys, I need y'all to help me with a tweak to the Concepts document, 
if you would be so good. In order to avoid definitional clashes 
between documents, I want to refer all of the details of the rdf 
XMLLiteral syntax and all talk of canonical XML and so on to the 
Concepts document. Unfortunately it doesnt actually define anywhere 
the thing I need to refer to.

Here's what I would like to be able to say:

if LLL is a <a href="...">well-formed XML literal</a> (that is, with 
or without a lang tag) then I(LLL) is the <a href="...">corresponding 
canonical XML document</a> as defined in [RDF Concepts].

or something similar. In other words, I need a single anchored 
definition of what counts as a 'well-formed' XML literal (with or 
without a lang tag) - there is no anchor for that - and a name for 
the thing it denotes, with an anchored definition. I don't really 
care what the name is (the above is only a guess), but it would be 
nice if it covered all the cases, rather than having to spell out the 
with-tag and without-tag cases separately. As Peter has noted, having 
to state them distinctly causes some problems in stating the semantic 
conditions, since a literal with a tag can denote the same thing as a 
different literal without a tag.

Thanks.

Pat

PS. BTW, on checking the lastcall concepts doc, I notice that it 
treats the no-tag case as equivalent to an empty tag, so that (if I 
follow it correctly)

"<a>word</a>"^^rdf:XMLLiteral

denotes

<rdf-wrapper lang=''><a>word</a></rdf-wrapper>

Do I have that right?



-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC					(850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973   home
40 South Alcaniz St.			(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola               			(850)202 4440   fax
FL 32501            				(850)291 0667    cell
phayes@ai.uwf.edu	          http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes
s.pam@ai.uwf.edu   for spam

Received on Wednesday, 5 February 2003 15:26:00 UTC