- From: Ruben Verborgh <ruben.verborgh@ugent.be>
- Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2014 12:42:51 +0200
- To: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
- Cc: public-hydra@w3.org
Hi Markus, > No, but you were actively involved in these discussions and provided a lot > of very valuable thoughts. So I want to make sure to get your feedback > before sending out another call for consensus. Shout out to you for doing a great job listening to everybody here! > Yeah, that's true. That's also what worries me about this approach but > apparently that's what the majority of the group wants. So my idea was to > explicitly mention that it is *simplified* Turtle (and thus not standard > Turtle) and explicitly call out the differences to the Turtle spec. The strange thing about "simplified Turtle" is that it is *incompatible* with “full Turtle”, which is unexpected. Sure, “simplified Turtle” parsers would not be able to parse “full Turtle”, but the other way around is non-intuitive. The name is therefore inappropriate. The proper term would actually be “non-escaped N-Triples literal syntax with bracketless IRIs” “The corresponding RDF lexical form is the characters between the delimiters, <del>after processing any escape sequences</del>. If present, the language tag is preceded by a '@'. If there is no language tag, there may be a datatype IRI, preceded by '^^'.” [1] I would just maybe non-normatively refer in the spec that the meaning of '@' and '^^' has been borrowed from Turtle/N-Triples, but call it something else. Bear in mind that this could also be very confusing to readers: “Do my parameters have to be simplified Turtle is my document is JSON-LD?” >> - TypedRepresentation (because we distinguish between literals and URIs) > > I don't like this as much as I fear people will have a quick look, recognize > it as Turtle and move on. Even worse with “simplified Turtle”. > I personally feel better to explicitly acknowledge > that it is *based* on Turtle but not truly Turtle. Does this makes sense to you? Not too much. The only thing it borrows is the meaning of '@' and '^^', there is no other relationship whatsoever. Best, Ruben [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/n-triples/
Received on Tuesday, 19 August 2014 10:43:27 UTC