- From: Arjohn Kampman <arjohn.kampman@aduna.biz>
- Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 15:22:40 +0200
- To: www-rdf-comments@w3.org, Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
Hi Dave, others, Someone posted a bug report on the Sesame forum for what he thought was an error in Sesame's RDF/XML parser[1]. I had a closer look at the RDF/XML syntax specification[2] and it appears that Sesame strictly adheres to this spec. This, however, surprised me, as I would have expected the data to be correct. Also, the W3C Validation Service[3] did parse the data as expected. The problematic data contains a datatyped (xsd:string) empty literal: <?xml version="1.0"?> <rdf:RDF xmlns="foo:bar#" xmlns:foo="foo:bar#" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xml:base="foo:bar"> <rdf:Description rdf:ID="ID1"> <foo:prop rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string" ></foo:prop> </rdf:Description> </rdf:RDF> If my understanding of the grammar in the spec is correct, then this data matches the 'emptyPropertyElt' rule, which does not allow the rdf:datatype attribute to be specified. This is not what I was expecting. Also, the grammar doesn't seem to allow the serialization of an empty xsd:string object in RDF/XML. So, what I would like to know is: is this a bug in the spec and Sesame, or is it a problem with ARP and the validation service? Regards, Arjohn [1] http://www.openrdf.org/forum/mvnforum/viewthread?thread=525 [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-syntax-grammar/ [3] http://www.w3.org/RDF/Validator/
Received on Friday, 1 April 2005 13:22:44 UTC