- From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 07:46:31 +0200
- To: Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org>
- Cc: RDF-WG WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>, Internationalization Core Working Group <www-international@w3.org>, Gavin Carothers <gavin@carothers.name>
Eric Prud'hommeaux, Tue, 2 Oct 2012 01:18:10 -0400: > explanation of I18N-ISSUE-190: attempting to erase combining marks? > =============================================================== > > Issue: Section 6.4. PN_CHARS_BASE erases various Unicode ranges > without explanation. This appears to be an attempt to eliminate > combining marks and the surrogates? > > Turtle's PN_CHARS_BASE > <http://www.w3.org/rdf-clean/rdf-turtle/index.html#grammar-production-PN_CHARS_BASE> > is derivative of XML's NameStartChar > <http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-xml-20081126/#NT-NameStartChar>, > presumably leveraging the wisdom which went into XML The wisdom expressed in the section you quote from XML only applies to documents with a document type declaration - also known as 'dtd': http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-xml-20081126/#dt-valid Thus it only relates to XML documents that should be checked for validity constraints expressed in a DTD. > identifiers. Changing this would have very large compatibility impact > on SPARQL, RDF/XML, OWL's XML format, GRDDL, etc. Is there motivation > to change XML? Are there any of those that operates with validity constraints? At least RDF/XML does not, AFAIK. > Please indicate whether this address the stated issue. -- Leif Halvard Silli
Received on Tuesday, 2 October 2012 05:47:04 UTC