Re: TriG being disjoint from Turtle

On 17/05/13 13:00, Peter Ansell wrote:
> On 17 May 2013 21:50, Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org
> <mailto:eric@w3.org>> wrote:
>
>     * Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org <mailto:sandro@w3.org>> [2013-05-17
>     07:38-0400]
>      > On 05/17/2013 06:00 AM, Jan Wielemaker wrote:
>      > >On 05/17/2013 11:49 AM, Andy Seaborne wrote:
>      > >
>      > >[this fragment is from Charles Greer, not answered by Andy]
>      > >
>      > >>1.  Could the spec be modified to allow TriG to be a superset of
>      > >>turtle?  Specifically, could the production rules be modified
>     to allow
>      > >>a set of triples outside of any '{'  '}' to be the same as
>     triples in a
>      > >>default anonymous graph?  It seems that even now, the rules allow
>      > >>multiple anonymous graph productions, whose union would be the
>     unnamed
>      > >>graph.  It would be convenient if we could dispense with these
>     anonymous
>      > >>curly braces altogether if possible.
>      > >
>      > >Having implemented TriG yesterday on top of the Turtle parser, I
>      > >must say that I was happily surprised that TriG does not allow for
>      > >triples
>      > >outside {}.  This means you can detect whether a document is a
>     Turtle
>      > >or TriG document at the first triple.
>      >
>      > Why do you want to do that?      I'm imagining a world where people
>      > load data by URL, not necessarily knowing if it's going to have
>      > named graphs in it.
>      >
>      > I'd think in a load_graph operation, you'd accept TriG as well,
>      > using the default graph as the output graph.   Maybe have a flag
>      > about whether to ignore or raise on error if there are some named
>      > graphs as well.
>      >
>      > And in a load_dataset operations, I'd think you'd accept Turtle as
>      > well, and just not get any named graphs out of it.
>
>     a hearty +1
>
>     There is trig out there, so there's a cost to changing it, but that's
>     a small cost compared to the missed opportunity have having compatible
>     languages.
>
>
>
> +1 from me.
>
> It mirrors the fact that all N-Triples documents are valid N-Quads
> documents.
>
> Peter

To round out the design space:
Question to everyone:

Should N-Quads in TriG be allowed?

Two sub-cases:
   As well as Turtle-in-TriG?
   Instead of Turtle-in-TriG?

c.f. Turtle and N-triples.

 Andy

Received on Friday, 17 May 2013 14:36:27 UTC