[oslc-core] Proposal for Issue-25: Encoding of UI preview label

[Steve K Speicher]

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 at IBMUS, 
> Cc: John Arwe/Poughkeepsie/IBM at IBMUS, oslc-core at open-services.net
> 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, joeross at us.ibm.com
> Tivoli Autonomic Computing & Component Technologies
> 512-286-8311, T/L 363-8311
> 
> From: Steve K Speicher/Raleigh/IBM
> To: John Arwe/Poughkeepsie/IBM at IBMUS, 
> Cc: Joe Ross/Austin/IBM at IBMUS, oslc-core at open-services.net, oslc-core-
> bounces at open-services.net
> 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