RE: Call for Consensus: FPWD for Semantics, TriG, N-Triples, N-Quads

I'm fine with publishing them as FPWD. However, I'm not convinced that
standardizing these variations or conventions as separate formats is a good
idea. An alternative would be to add a profile media type parameter to
Turtle (which should still be possible because it would be optional) and
TriG.

So, an N-Quads file could be served as follows:

Content-Type: application/trig;
profile="http://www.w3.org/ns/formats/N-Quad"

We do something similar in JSON-LD to signal/request
expanded/compacted/flattened documents.


Cheers,
Markus


--
Markus Lanthaler
@markuslanthaler



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Guus Schreiber [mailto:guus.schreiber@vu.nl]
> Sent: Monday, March 18, 2013 12:44 AM
> To: RDF WG
> Subject: Call for Consensus: FPWD for Semantics, TriG, N-Triples, N-
> Quads
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> This is a Call for Consensus (CfC) to publish the First Public Working
> Draft (FPWD) of the following four documents:
> 
> RDF Semantics:
>    https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-mt/index.html#
> TriG
>    https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/trig/index.html
> N-Triples:
>    https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-turtle/n-
> triples.html
> N-Quads:
>    https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/nquads/index.html
> 
> Silence will be taken to mean there is no objection, but positive
> responses are encouraged. If there are no objections within the time
> frame of one week, this resolution will carry.
> 
> Considerations to note:
> - As a First Public Working Draft, this publication will trigger patent
> policy review.
> - As a Working Draft publication, the document does not need not be
> complete, to meet all technical requirements, or to have consensus on
> the contents.
> 
> Guus

Received on Monday, 18 March 2013 15:35:59 UTC