- From: David Robillard <d@drobilla.net>
- Date: Sat, 03 Mar 2012 17:20:31 -0500
- To: Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>
- Cc: public-rdf-comments@w3.org
On Fri, 2012-03-02 at 08:19 +0100, Henry Story wrote: > pretty much the only positive test that fails for me at present consistently across Jena, Sesame and my > implementation is Test-29.ttl [1] which contains the following statement > > <http://example.org/node> <http://example.org/prop> <scheme:\u0001\u0002\u0003\u0004\u0005\u0006\u0007\u0008\t\n\u000B\u000C\r\u000E\u000F\u0010\u0011\u0012\u0013\u0014\u0015\u0016\u0017\u0018\u0019\u001A\u001B\u001C\u001D\u001E\u001F !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:/<=\u003E?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~\u007F> . > > This is causing the apache abdera IRI [2] library to barf . It looks like they put a lot of energy into this library, and so that's made me wonder where the error lies. This can be reproduced like this on the scala console This test always puzzled me a bit, since as far as I can tell \u escapes like this in an IRI is not valid, but a Turtle/Sparql specific thing. This is a bit of a devil's advocate question, since I'd rather not implement two escape mechanisms when one will do, but shouldn't percent encoding be used to escape things in URIs/IRIs? Can other software be expected to actually understand URIs like this, or is it intended/desirable that machine processing would have to happen before they can be 'exported'? -dr
Received on Saturday, 3 March 2012 22:20:57 UTC