- From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: 15 Jul 2003 19:27:12 +0100
- To: Frank Manola <fmanola@mitre.org>
- Cc: Martin Duerst <duerst@w3.org>, rdf core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>, i18n <w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org>
On Tue, 2003-07-15 at 19:15, Frank Manola wrote: > Brian-- > > Perhaps I shouldn't have said "test case" (since I haven't checked the > Test Cases document), and I don't know what the status of the files > is/are. I'm referring to the files "example09.rdf" and "example09.nt" > referred to in the title of Example 9 in > http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/TR/WD-rdf-syntax-grammar-20030117/ > (these are the same as in the LC WD as far as I can tell). Right, thanks Frank. I think this example was right at last call, but that Martin is right and its wrong now, given the post last call decision to change the handling of xml literal. JJC may confirm. Its on my list to check that we get it right, so it wont get forgotten. Brian > > --Frank > > Brian McBride wrote: > > > > On Tue, 2003-07-15 at 16:27, Frank Manola wrote: > > > Martin-- > > > > > > Thanks. As I said in my original message, this is a related issue > > > then. That is, you may think that the XML namespace information > > > *should* be carried over into the XML literal, per your response to my > > > question #3, but if you look at the Test Case associated with Example 9 > > > of the Syntax specification, example09.rdf (the RDF/XML) has the "a" > > > namespace declaration, but that namespace declaration does not appear in > > > the XML literal generated as the object of the corresponding output RDF > > > triple (example09.nt). > > > > Is that an old test case not updated since the post last call change to > > xml literals? > > > > Brian
Received on Tuesday, 15 July 2003 14:37:34 UTC