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

Re: On Graph is in Turtle (was Re: today's minutes available)

From: Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@us.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2011 07:13:29 -0700
To: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
Cc: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <OFDF319D14.05BE39EF-ON8825791E.004D3F76-8825791E.004E20AB@us.ibm.com>
> From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
> 
> On 28/09/11 23:45, Arnaud Le Hors wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > I was on a cellphone driving and it was too noisy for me to voice my
> > opinion then but I meant to say that, regarding the Graphs in Turtle
> > question, I find the @graph proposal more appealing than the {} one. I
> > think it is more consistent with what we already have in Turtle.
> >
> > It might sound silly but on a practical level I also find it 
convenient to
> > be able to add an @graph statement in my existing document without 
having
> > to re-indent all the following lines the way I would with the {} 
proposal.
> > I know that's not necessarily a high priority criteria but at the same
> > time Turtle was invented to make it easy for humans to write and read 
rdf
> > so I'd argue it's not totally off base either.
> 
> Indentation isn't required when using {} in TriG:
> 
> <g> { <s> <p> <p> }
> 
> is a legal TriG document as is:
> 
> <g> {
> <s> <p> <p>
> }
> 
> so you do have the effect of a small amount of extra text around an 
> existing Turtle document to make it a TriG document.  Like Tuttle, you 
> can use white space as you want.

Of course. All I meant is that it's the natural thing to do and because 
I'm anal I would "need" to indent them. :-)
--
Arnaud  Le Hors - Software Standards Architect - IBM Software Group
Received on Monday, 3 October 2011 14:14:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:25:45 GMT