RDF Issue rdfms-xml-literal-namespaces

Stefan,

In

     http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-interest/2001Mar/0022.html

you raised an issue which was captured in

   http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-xml-literal-namespaces

as

[[[
The RDF XML syntax permits Literals which consist of XML markup. Is the 
value of the literal the string of characters as they appear in the the 
source document? If it is, then the association of namespace prefixes to 
namespace URI's may be lost. Alternatively, an RDF processor may be 
required to modify the XML markup as necessary to preserve the association 
between namespace prefixes and namespace URI's.

]]]

As recorded in

   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Mar/0235.html

the RDFCore WG has resolved:

  o the exact form of the string value corresponding to any given XML 
Literal within RDF/XML is implementation dependent.

  o the string value is well-balanced XML

  o taking the exclusive canonicalization of both the original XML Literal 
in its containing document, and the string value of the literal produce the 
same character string. (this will be used as the basis for test cases)

  o the canonicalization above is without comments i.e. CONFORMANCE should 
be tested by canonicalizing without comments; comments may be included in 
the string representation of a literal

  o this issue is closed

  o to raise a comment on the XQuery/XPath 2.0 data model that it does not 
adequately address the handling of namespace prefixes appearing in 
attribute values.

Roughly speaking, this means that:

   o an rdf parser should add relevant namespace declarations to the string 
representation of the literal

   o it may not spot namespaces that are used only in attribute values - an 
issue that we will raise with the appropriate WG

   o it is implementation dependent whether XML comments are retained in 
the string or not

   o the xml canonicalization of the strings produced by all 
implementations should be equal - which is how we test for conformance

Please could you respond to this message, copying www-rdf-comments@w3.org 
indicating whether this is an acceptable resolution of this issue.

Brian McBride
RDFCore co-chair

Received on Thursday, 21 March 2002 15:01:07 UTC