Re: pfps-06

Pat,

I think there's a possibly valid objection in that XMLLiteral datatyped 
literals are now not self-denoting, if I understand the latest Concepts 
specification correctly.  Apparently, the literal form is a sequence of 
characters, but the literal value is a corresponding sequence of octets 
encoding those characters.

[[
The lexical space
     is the set of all strings which:

...

The value space
     is the set of all exclusive Canonical XML (with comments, with empty 
InclusiveNamespaces PrefixList ) ...

Note: The lexical space and value spaces differ in that the lexical space 
is a set of Unicode strings, whereas the value space is a set of UTF-8 
octet sequences.
]]
-- 
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/TR/WD-rdf-concepts-20030117/#section-XMLLiteral

to find more details of the distinction, you need to follow some links...

[[
The exclusive canonical form of a document subset is a physical 
representation of the XPath node-set, as an octet sequence, produced by the 
method described in this specification.
]]
-- 
http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/REC-xml-exc-c14n-20020718/#def-exclusive-canonical-XML

This is enough to see that the value space is an octet sequence rather than 
a character sequence.  For further details, dig further...

#g
--

At 14:59 23/07/03 -0500, pat hayes wrote:

>>From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
>>Subject: pfps-06
>>Date: 21 Jul 2003 14:28:58 +0100
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>  Peter,
>>>
>>>  with reference to your comment recorded as
>>>
>>>    http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#pfps-06
>>>
>>>  the RDFCore WG has resolved to accept this comment.
>>>
>>>  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Jul/0236.html
>>>
>>>  As you know, there have been extensive modifications to the description of
>>>  the datatyping semantics since your comment was written
>>>
>>>  The current editor's draft, which is stable enough to review,
>>>
>>>  http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/TR/WD-rdf-mt-20030117/
>>>
>>>  now contains an account of datatyping and XML literals which treats
>>>  XML literals uniformly with other typed literals and is more explicit
>>>  about the exact status of LV.
>>>
>>>  Please reply to this message, copying www-rdf-comments@w3.org,
>>>  indicating whether this response adequately addresses your comment.
>>>
>>>  Brian
>>
>>The document is internally inconsistent on the treatment of XML Literals.
>>
>>The change list in the document Semantics says that XML literals ``are now
>>required to be in canonical form and therefore to denote their own literal
>>string.''  This appears to mean that XML literals are just a subset of
>>character strings.  This is completely counter to what is said in RDF
>>Concepts, at least the version pointed to from the document.
>
>Peter, please be so good as to review the document.itself, not the change 
>list, which is not worded carefully and is intended only to be a guide to 
>the changes made in the document. If you would prefer, I could provide you 
>with a copy with the change list deleted.
>
>Pat
>
>>However, Section 3 of the document Semantics has no mention of the fact
>>that XML literals denote themselves.  It also says that is ``is
>>deliberately agnostic as to whether or not XML data is considered to be
>>identical to a character string'', which is in direct contradiction to the
>>wording in the change list.
>>
>>So, I do not feel that my concerns in this area have been adequately
>>addressed.
>>
>>Peter F. Patel-Schneider
>
>
>--
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>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@ihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes

-------------------
Graham Klyne
<GK@NineByNine.org>
PGP: 0FAA 69FF C083 000B A2E9  A131 01B9 1C7A DBCA CB5E

Received on Wednesday, 23 July 2003 16:14:17 UTC