- From: Art Barstow <barstow@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 08:35:50 -0400
- To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: Graham.Klyne@Baltimore.com, www-rdf-validator@w3.org
Yes I thought about adding such a checkbox when I saw Graham's posting: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-validator/2001Sep/0012.html I'll try to add that option in the next week or so. Art --- On Fri, Sep 07, 2001 at 10:21:12AM +0100, Jeremy Carroll wrote: > > Graham wrote: > > Ironically, I've just sent a report to the W3C online validator because it > > doesn't work as required in the absence of <rdf:RDF>. > > Art > > I thought I should explain the viewpoint I took with ARP. > Basically they are two entry points to the parser. > One assumes that we are looking at an XML document with (embedded) RDF > explicitly marked by rdf:RDF. The other assumes that we are looking at an > RDF/XML document and the whole content is to be taken as such. The > com.hp.hpl.jena.rdf.arp.NTriple -r flag uses the second of these; the > default in ARP is to assume the former. > > I take it in the validator that you have followed the ARP default. > > My view is that the validator web page should have a check box to use this > option or not. > Obviously the alternative of jumping one way (as at present) or the other > (like SiRPAC) is also plausible. > > My views are clear my by choice of default and my contributions to the WG > discussion. > > Jeremy
Received on Friday, 7 September 2001 08:37:33 UTC