- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 13:19:58 +0100
- To: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
In 1.2 in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0489.html the XML Schema WG say: [[ In brief, XML Schema's simple types each define a whitespace facet, which governs the kind of whitespace pre-processing done by an XML Schema processor before the lexical form is checked for type validity. ]] We have ignored this, and all facets, to date. A result, which may cause confustion is that: <rdf:Description> <eg:p rdf:datatype="&xsd;int"> 3 </eg:p> </rdf:Description> has an ill-formed literal (however we say that). It is ill-formed because we make no provision for the whitespace normalization envisaged in XML Schema Datatypes. We could have decided that: [[ For those RDF datatypes that are XML Schema datatypes, - the facets are a part of their formal structure in RDF - whitespace handling is done before the lexical to value mapping, in conformance with Xml schema part 2. ]] We would have significant editorial obstacles; the most obvious way to descibe this would be as part of the lexical to value mapping, which is *not* how XML Schema do it. In the corresponding XML Schema case the string " 3 " in the document has its whitespace stripped to "3" early, and "3" is the lexical value that is mapped to the integer three. I see a lrage amount of RDF data and implementations that are confused about whitespace handling in RDF. Partly this may reflect on M&S, but some examples are (under)informed by our WDs. Jeremy
Received on Wednesday, 12 March 2003 07:19:27 UTC