Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

I18N Review: does Policy Metadata need Unicode normalization #212

Closed
riannella opened this issue Jul 21, 2017 · 1 comment
Closed

I18N Review: does Policy Metadata need Unicode normalization #212

riannella opened this issue Jul 21, 2017 · 1 comment

Comments

@riannella
Copy link
Contributor

From: @bert-github
Source: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-poe-comments/2017Jul/0000.html

Hello POE WG,

The I18N WG reviewed your drafts odrl-model and odrl-vocab (thanks for
the self-review!) and found no i18n issues, except for this question:

In the section Policy Metadata[1], there are strings that may be added
to a Policy, in particular Dublin Core metadata. These strings are in
Unicode, but the specification doesn't say if they are normalized.

That is not necessarily a problem, unless those strings are compared to
other strings (to build conditions, for search, etc.). It seems indeed
these strings aren't used by ODRL in any comparisons. Is that the case?

[1] https://w3c.github.io/poe/model/#provenace

@riannella
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks for the feedback @bert-github

We discussed this at the WG teleconference yesterday [1] and we agreed that the dublin core metadata properties used in an ODRL Policy are not designed to be used for comparisons.

We will add a note to that effect in that section to be clear.

[1] https://www.w3.org/2017/07/31-poe-minutes#item04

riannella added a commit that referenced this issue Aug 1, 2017
@riannella riannella removed this from Wide/Horiz Review in ODRL Deliverables Review Aug 1, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants