Yes, just making sure. Thanks. ================================================ Joe Ross/Austin/IBM, [email protected] Tivoli Autonomic Computing & Component Technologies 512-286-8311, T/L 363-8311
From: Steve K Speicher/Raleigh/IBM To: Joe Ross/Austin/IBM@IBMUS, Cc: John Arwe/Poughkeepsie/IBM@IBMUS, [email protected] Date: 07/27/2012 09:20 AM Subject: Re: [oslc-core] Proposal for Issue-25: Encoding of UI preview label Joe, Nothing is changing with value types in Core and XMLLiteral is still there with this issue #25 This issue (25) is narrowly focused on 2 XML elements (dcterms:title and dcterms:description) within the UIPreview spec's definition of oslc:Compact, the fact that they are string value types. This does NOT change the Core's recommendation for RDF properties dcterms:title and dcterms:description and their value type. Does that clear it up? Thanks, Steve Speicher | IBM Rational Software | (919) 254-0645 Joe Ross/Austin/IBM wrote on 07/27/2012 09:50:43 AM: > From: Joe Ross/Austin/IBM > To: Steve K Speicher/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS, > Cc: John Arwe/Poughkeepsie/IBM@IBMUS, [email protected] > Date: 07/27/2012 09:55 AM > Subject: Re: [oslc-core] Proposal for Issue-25: Encoding of UI preview label > > I think we are saying that we are not changing the OSLC-core defined data > type for the dcterms:identifier property. It would still have a value type > of XMLLiteral when used in RDF which is based on OSLC core. Is that right? > > Joe > > ================================================ > Joe Ross/Austin/IBM, [email protected] > Tivoli Autonomic Computing & Component Technologies > 512-286-8311, T/L 363-8311 > > From: Steve K Speicher/Raleigh/IBM > To: John Arwe/Poughkeepsie/IBM@IBMUS, > Cc: Joe Ross/Austin/IBM@IBMUS, [email protected], oslc-core- > [email protected] > Date: 07/27/2012 07:25 AM > Subject: Re: [oslc-core] Proposal for Issue-25: Encoding of UI preview label > > > > Something I need to be clear on: is it the case that this issue applies only > > to UI preview because UI preview is the only case in OSLC where a resource > > is defined to be XML and not RDF? > > Since XMLLiteral is defined by RDF, an XML-based resource definition does > > not "have access to" its definition (it's outside of XML, and going outside > > of XML for its definition is not desireable)? > This issue is really about that the content of these XML elements really > should just be strings and not embedded XML content, regarding of how the > value type is defined (i.e. XMLLiteral definition in RDF/XML or complex > content in XML). It just happens we were down a path "make our XML > consumable by RDF/XML parsers as well" which added to some confusion. The > issue originated due to the complexities of the primary consumer of this > content is HTML/JS, so having to parse the content and convert to HTML tags > was onerous compared with just grabbing the content of the title/description > and just jamming into a node. > > Hope that adds some clarity. > > Thanks, > Steve Speicher | IBM Rational Software | (919) 254-0645
