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

Re: [TTL] Differences between SPARQL and Turtle.

From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
Date: Wed, 04 May 2011 13:39:12 +0100
Message-ID: <4DC148F0.1040403@epimorphics.com>
To: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
Richard's wording is fine by me.

On 04/05/11 10:16, Ivan Herman wrote:
>
> On May 4, 2011, at 10:53 , Richard Cyganiak wrote:
>
>>
>> On 3 May 2011, at 07:42, Andy Seaborne wrote:
>>> On 03/05/11 00:07, Richard Cyganiak wrote:
>>>> Unicode escapes can be a helpful fallback when some piece of the
>>>> toolchain messes up the encoding; in such situations, they can be the
>>>> only way to make things interoperate.
>>>
>>> Could you give examples of this?  Messing up the encoding that I see happens silently, due to system defaults.  \u-escape does not have an impact on that (unfortunately).
>>
>> Simple example: editing a Turtle file in a text editor that doesn't understand that Turtle files are UTF-8. Entering non-US-ASCII characters (say, umlauts) in the editor will result in wrongly (say, ISO-8859-1) encoded files. Entering the umlauts as \u escapes is not pretty but solves the immediate problem.
>>
>
> Unfortunately, this indeed happens (in my case, it may become even worse, because if I use Hungarian characters, then it should use ISO-8859-2, and many editors did not even heard about that animal).

The case of wanting to write in Greek on a English system - the odd 
character in \u is OK but after a while, it's a bit impractical.

>
> (That being said, I refuse to use editors that do not understand UTF-8 these days:-)

	Andy
Received on Wednesday, 4 May 2011 12:39:50 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:25:42 GMT