- From: Zhe Wu <alan.wu@oracle.com>
- Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2011 10:28:21 -0700
- To: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
- CC: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>, public-rdf-wg@w3.org
Hi Richard, Well, seeing "Großräschen" is only better when the engineer understands that particular language, isn't it? To me personally, seeing that encoded string is better than a string containing characters that I don't read. On the Linux terminal I am using, I can't even cut & paste that string. It only gets the "Gro" portion right. I understand the perspective of developer usability and a possible escaping cost for implementation on some platforms. However, none of them seems to be significant enough to justify all the potential interoperability, and backward compatibility issues. Thanks, Zhe On 8/21/2011 8:06 AM, Richard Cyganiak wrote: > Zhe, > > On 20 Aug 2011, at 02:34, Zhe Wu wrote: >> I don't see how adding UTF8 encoding can make N-TRIPLES much more useful. > For data debugging and developer usability, seeing "Großräschen" in an N-Triples document is better than seeing "Gro\u00DFr\u00E4schen". > > It also decreases the cost of implementing N-Triples serializers, because they can now directly emit UTF-8 strings rather than requiring a custom escaping routine for handling non-US-ASCII characters. > > Best, > Richard
Received on Sunday, 21 August 2011 17:29:14 UTC