W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > August 2011

Re: Oracle's stand regarding N-TRIPLES

From: Jeremy Carroll <jeremy@topquadrant.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2011 15:26:03 -0700
Message-ID: <4E4D917B.9070509@topquadrant.com>
To: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
Hi Zhe

I find this a surprisingly strong position.
When ingesting N-Triples the code path to read UTF-8 and the code path 
to read \uXXXX escape sequences are probably equally horrible. The UTF-8 
code path is the more conventional one to be following on the Web.

It seems like a fairly small amount of extra code for a vendor to 
support, with negligible impact on performance. The only downside, that 
I can see, would be that new data will not be readable by old software, 
which is the normal downside with new versions of a format.

We may differ in our judgment about how important that downside is, or I 
may have missed some other disadvantage that motivates Oracle's strong 
reaction.

My understanding is that 2004 N-triples docs will be valid turtle docs ....

Jeremy



On 8/18/2011 9:05 AM, Zhe Wu wrote:
> Hi,
>
> After discussing with the whole Oracle Database Semantic Technologies 
> team, we
> have the following consensus within Oracle.
>
> 1) The existing N-TRIPLES format [1] is key to Oracle's product;
> 2) Oracle hasn't received from Oracle's customers any change 
> request/suggestions regarding the current N-TRIPLES syntax;
> 3) As a platform vendor, Oracle does not see any significant 
> justifications to change/mend the existing syntax;
>
> Hence Oracle will not support any major changes to the existing 
> N-TRIPLE format, including
> support for UTF-8.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Zhe&  Souri
>
> [1]http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-testcases/#ntriples  (In "RDF Test Cases: 
> W3C Recommendation 10 February 2004")
>
>
Received on Thursday, 18 August 2011 22:26:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:25:44 GMT