Re: Proposed fixed version of N-Triples https://www.w3.org/TR/n-triples/ Section 7

> On 29 Jun 2017, at 13:01, Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I was hoping that my message would (instead) trigger a broader examination of
> the grammars for N-Triples, N-Quads, and Turtle and result in
> community-approved revised grammars for each of them.  Each of these grammars
> has problems.  The problems with the N-Triples grammar are the easiest to fix.

One does not include the other… I mean, you (in plural, seeing the short discussion on swig) did identify an erratum which must therefore be recorded. If there is a wider discussion that leads to more proposals, we just have to record those as well…

(In my experience not many people read and/or active on public-rdf-comments, I do not think you will get a lot of discussion on this list…:-(

Ivan


> 
> peter
> 
> On 06/29/2017 03:17 AM, Ivan Herman wrote:
>> Peter,
>> 
>> I have added this to the official Errata list:
>> 
>> https://www.w3.org/2001/sw/wiki/RDF1.1_Errata
>> 
>> Thanks
>> 
>> Ivan


----
Ivan Herman, W3C
Publishing@W3C Technical Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704