W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > August 2001

Re: Is N-Triples Normative? [Was: Re: model theory (W3C publication stuff)]

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001 08:36:40 -0500
Message-ID: <3B8E4168.74BF443@w3.org>
To: Art Barstow <barstow@w3.org>
CC: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Art Barstow wrote:
[...]
> In the Open Issues of [2]:
> 
>  http://www.w3.org/2001/08/rdf-test/#intro_issues
> 
> The issue "is N-Triples normative?" is raised.  Given the
> MT's reference to N-Triples it seems the answer is yes.
> 
> What do the WG members think about this issue?

I don't really know how to answer questions of the
form "is X normative"? Here are some questions
I can answer that are perhaps relevant:

	1. does our specification of n-triples
	constrain the set of XML documents that
	conform to the RDF 1.0 spec?

	No.

	2. does our specification of n-triples
	constrain software that conforms
	to the RDF 1.0 spec?

	No.

	3. does the RDF 1.0 spec say that RDF/xml
	is the only syntax in which RDF may be expressed?

	No.

	4. does/should the model theory *depend* on
	the definition of n-triples?

	No; it's independent of any particular
	serialization of RDF.

	5. is it useful to use n-triples as
	an editorial device in the model theory document?

	Yes, I think so.

	6. should the model theory draft cite the n-triples
	definition from the testing draft?

	Yes; given 4 above, I suppose this should
	be an informative citation, if we're going
	to distinguish informative from normative
	citations at this point in the drafting process.


>  [1] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/ntriples/
>  [2] http://www.w3.org/2001/08/rdf-test/

-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Thursday, 30 August 2001 09:36:42 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:38:49 EDT