W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > July 2011

Re: ACTION-60: Discuss Turtle doc schedule with ericP

From: Gavin Carothers <gavin@topquadrant.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2011 12:37:12 -0700
Message-ID: <CAPqY83zm1vqBsfqqbenRMHZEVVQnSmHR8jC60M1o2NZP=pss=w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
Cc: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 10:33 AM, Andy Seaborne
<andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com> wrote:
> Looks good to publish as a WD.
> In reading through, I noticed some points, none of which block publication:
> 1/ The grammar has lost it's borders, internal and external.
>   The table in 5.2 seems to be broken.
>   Linsk to terminals don't work.

There are more issues then that with the grammar as a table at the
moment. I'm okay with a WD before those are all fixed.

> 2/ Hasn't the text/turtle registration been done? if so, shouldn't the
> registration be removed? The registration references the Turtle submission.

Not sure, will defer to Eric on that one.

> 3/ Terminology: They are not qnames - as we are deviating from XML's qnames,
> it is better to use a different name.  They are prefixed names in SPARQL
> (although that isn't ideal as XML NS uses that as well - not CURIE which is
> more general).  It creates confusion otherwise.

"prefixed names" will work at the moment I guess, better then QName.
Noting that RDFa Core 1.1 currently refers to these names as compact
URI expressions (CURIE) in Turtle.

"Note that CURIEs are only used in the markup and Turtle examples, and
will never appear in the generated triples, which are defined by RDF
to use IRI references."

> 4/ "Turtle is intended to be compatible with, and a subset of, Notation 3"
> then links to differences.
> The mention of N3 in the abstract and intro needs to go - Turtle is a syntax
> in it's own right, not a subset of N3, which is a significant input but not
> a design goal.  Many people wil come to RDF via Turtle. The fine details of
> prefixed names, escaping etc are diffrrent.

Yes, treating turtle files as N3 doesn't work, nor is it a design goal
any more. Removed statement about compatibility. Currently leaving the
historical mention of N3 as the source of "useful and appropriate
things". Added specific statement about incompatibility to the
informative comparison section.

> 5/ "The recommended XML syntax for RDF, RDF/XML"
>   This will also be a recommended syntax.

Dropping "The recommended XML syntax for RDF,", to avoid suggesting in
anyway that someone reading the Turtle spec should think RDF/XML is
recommended ;) Moving the whole bit about RDF/XML to the compared to
other languages section.


> On 05/07/11 13:37, Eric Prud'hommeaux wrote:
>> * Guus Schreiber<guus.schreiber@vu.nl>  [2011-06-28 05:10+0200]
>>> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/60
>>> Eric and I discussed today, at K-CAP in sunny Banff, theTurtle doc
>>> schedule. Eric thinks it is feasible to produce a first draft with
>>> notes for open issues within a few days. If all goes smoothly, we
>>> might be able to discuss this next week at our telecon.
>> I expect this is too late for review for this week, but I've added two
>> issues
>>   plain literals are a shortcut for xsd:strings
>>   QNames have same escaping as IRIs and strings
>> to the working draft at
>>   http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/tip/rdf-turtle/index.html
>> and I'm happy to publish (modulo fixing anchors in the grammar, but
>> that's a pubrules issue).
>>> FYI
>>> Guus
>>> --
>>> Prof. Guus Schreiber
>>> Web&  Media, Computer Science
>>> VU University Amsterdam
>>> http://www.cs.vu.nl/~guus
Received on Tuesday, 5 July 2011 19:37:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:04:07 UTC