- From: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
- Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2013 17:41:34 -0500
- To: public-rdf-comments <public-rdf-comments@w3.org>
Regarding section 4, Conformance:
https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-turtle/n-triples.html
It would be helpful if tools that generate N-Triples were strongly
encouraged to generate it in canonical form unless there would be a
significant loss to the user in doing so. For example, if a tool
normally generates useful information in comments, it may be better to
generate non-canonical N-Triples, since canonical N-Triples would
require the comments to be removed.
I suggest adding something like the following to section 4:
"Tools that generate N-Triples documents SHOULD generate
**canonical N-Triples documents** unless doing so would
result in a significant loss in functionality or performance.
For example, if a tool normally generates useful information
in comments, it may be preferable to generate non-canonical
N-Triples, since canonical N-Triples requires comments to be
removed."
Please note that the RDF 2119 definition of SHOULD is:
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt
[[
3. SHOULD This word, or the adjective "RECOMMENDED", mean that there
may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to ignore a
particular item, but the full implications must be understood and
carefully weighed before choosing a different course.
]]
Because SHOULD allows this judgement-call-based wiggle room, this change
would not have to affect any conformance tests.
If the working group decides that a "SHOULD" would be too strong, please
instead add an editorial comment to the above effect instead, such as by
saying "are strongly encouraged to" instead of "SHOULD".
Thanks,
David
Received on Tuesday, 3 December 2013 22:42:04 UTC