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

Re: [Turtle] Two formats

From: Nathan <nathan@webr3.org>
Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2011 18:09:27 +0000
Message-ID: <4D712AD7.90603@webr3.org>
To: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
CC: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>, RDF-WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Richard Cyganiak wrote:
> On 3 Mar 2011, at 21:56, Steve Harris wrote:
>>> I don't think you can argue that users have one firm expectation for the handling of N-Triples and a different firm expectation for N-Quads.
>> I really can. The usecases for those file formats are significantly different.
> I dispute that. I believe that both are mostly used for exchanging large RDF dumps (ignoring the use of N-Triples for test cases).

N-Triples could become quite significant for real time triple streams, 
live updates, and live (single) resource/graph synchronization. It would 
be nice if N-Quads was a superset of N-Triples, but N-Triples being a 
distinct thing with it's own media type would also be an easy, 
beneficial, hit.

I don't see any reason to argue here, there are people saying they need 
both, and for one to be distinct (triple only), why not provide it.
Received on Friday, 4 March 2011 18:11:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:04:03 UTC