RE: N3 and N-Triples (was: RDF in HTML: Approaches)

> <uri-refs> - except for handing \\ and \"  It was carefully
> designed so that they can be compared as byte-sequences, since for
> each Unicode character there is only one way to escape it.

I have no doubt it was carefully designed, but one could question the
wisdom of spending RDF WG resources on carefully designing yet another
Unicode canonicalization scheme.  I have no doubts that the WG would be
very responsive to bug reports and would work with anyone who contacted
them with problems in the n-triples format.  But, if I were the test
lead for a platforms project using RDF, I would want more than just the
assurance and good will of someone who worked on the spec.  I would
want:
	* Proof that the format was widely used, tested, and reliable
for transporting international data
	* Endorsement from some groups who work specifically on
international data processing

Considering that there already *are* formats which meet those two
criteria, and since n-triples at this point meets neither, it would be
hard for me to justify choosing n-triples as a testing format.

(And FWIW, if I were developing conformance tests for vendors to use to
determine conformance to the spec, these issues would, IMO be even more
important.)