Re: canonical representation

Hi Piero,

Thanks for your vote!

> I would go for following as much as possible the N-quads format,

Note: something we discussed in the group
is that N-Quads can have different representations for the same string,
due to escape sequences.

So if we go the N-Triples route,
we still have to decide what to do with escaping.
One option is to _not_ have any escaping;
the resulting strings are then possibly invalid N-Triples,
but they would be much easier to compare and generate.

> I see a risk in having a different canonical for triples that are practically the same, for example:
> ?movie <http://schema.org/name> "The real history of the marshmellow"@en
> ?movie <http://schema.org/name> "The real history of the marshmellow"

That would be a feature, not a bug ;-)

Best,

Ruben

Received on Monday, 4 January 2016 16:30:37 UTC