W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-comments@w3.org > July to September 2001

Comments on WD-rdf-testcases-20010912

From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2001 19:28:03 +0200
To: www-rdf-comments@w3.org
Cc: barstow@w3.org, dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk
Message-ID: <mkccqtgsf9mp40a3177f68cq1uos6fi9bs@4ax.com>

   I wonder why the working drafts doesn't reference RFC 2396 for the
absoluteURI syntax and instead uses a very loose syntax definition with
incompatible character escape sequences. The [CHARMOD] requires
specifications to specify that URIs are escaped like


but the RDF Test Cases WD implies, one should use




The specification should clearly state that four characters must follow
the \u and eight characters the \U. I don't see any good reason why \U
is defined for


(note the unmatched bracket) instead of ...-#x10FFFF, Unicode doesn't
define anything above. The \U should IMO only require six hex digits
instead of eight, otherwise authors have always to specify two
superflous zero digits. I would recommend a more perlish approach for \u
and \U in general, i.e. use \u{ <one to six hex digits> } in place of

I _really_ wonder why #20, #3C and #3E should be additionally allowed
for absoluteURIs. They have to be URI-escaped, the WD implies I should


instead of 


That's IMO pure nonsense.

The reference to Python string literals should be removed, I don't care
about Python string literals and they are of no relevance here.

I don't see no need for the trailing '.' character required for each
n-triple line.

[CHARMOD] - http://www.w3.org/TR/charmod

Björn Höhrmann { mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de } http://www.bjoernsworld.de
am Badedeich 7 } Telefon: +49(0)4667/981028 { http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
25899 Dagebüll { PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 } http://www.learn.to/quote/
Received on Monday, 17 September 2001 13:29:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:15:15 UTC