>>>Roland Schwaenzl said:
> Dave wrote:
> > I don't understand what your problem is
>
> RDF/XML parsed by
> different parsers is supposed to yield
> the same models or not?
Yes. In the existing M&S, the language as part of the literal could
be ignored, so the two examples can be seen as equivlent. We are
making a change - xml:lang is required to be supported and is
significant. This is a good thing, right?
> Apparently W3C's RDF validator gives
> models different from those you suggest.
The validator will be updated in due course - when there is a written
up RDF Core WG decision, approved test cases, and the test cases
language has been updated. Please be patient.
Dave
|