- From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
- Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2011 20:08:11 +0100
- To: Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org>
- CC: RDF-WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
> I agree with both uses, but I believe that users have come to expect
> numeric escapes to get around language lexing contraints and would
> find the fact that "ab\u0022 parses as a literal a bit of a shock.
There's no uniformity:
Legal Java:
String x = "ab\u0022 ;
System.out.println(x) ;
IIGC:
whereas C# allows \u in identifiers, character literals, and regular
string literals.
Perl uses \x (\u means Titlecase next character)
Python allows \u like \"
C has \xhh
Some languages use \X for anything X to mean X if it's not \n, \t etc.
but that's not the real issue. It's whether to widen the prefix name
local name part, regardless of mechanism, and about aligning SPARQL and
Turtle.
Getting characters into IRIs via prefix names is less of a concern to me
than
a:b\u0020
getting bad characters in.
Andy
Received on Sunday, 24 April 2011 19:08:38 UTC