Re: comments in functional-style syntax

I believe that the HTTP protocol allows specification of the character
set, which would allow for other character encodings.   The SHOULD will,
I believe, mean that if there is no specification of character encoding
then utf-8 will be applied but maybe this should be explicitly stated.

peter



From: "Alan Ruttenberg" <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: comments in functional-style syntax
Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2008 00:04:50 -0400

> Hello Peter,
> If one SHOULD use the utf-8 encoding, do we not need some way of
> specifying if an alternate choice is made? Perhaps it would make sense
> to simply specify this as a MUST.
> -Alan
> 
> 
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 11:42 AM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider
> <pfps@research.bell-labs.com> wrote:
> >
> > Also for syntax:
> >
> > http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/index.php?title=Syntax&diff=14280&oldid=14275
> >
> > peter
> >
> >
> > From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
> > Subject: comments in Manchester syntax
> > Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2008 09:16:55 -0400 (EDT)
> >
> >> I added Turtle-style comments to the Manchester syntax document.
> >>
> >> The diffs are at:
> >>
> >> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/index.php?title=ManchesterSyntax&diff=14178&oldid=13954
> >>
> >>
> >> peter
> >
> >

Received on Saturday, 1 November 2008 12:50:52 UTC