pchampin left a comment (w3ctag/design-reviews#1161) Thanks for this review. Re. concatenation: concatenating two N-Triples files results in a compliant N-Triples file. This was the case in RDF 1.1 and is still the case in RDF 1.2. Note however that such concatenation was never without risk: identical blank node labels in the files being concatenated will result in (possibly) unintended merging of blank nodes. So yes, concatenating an N-Triples 1.1 file with an N-Triples 1.2 file "contaminates" the first one with 1.2 features, and this should only be done after careful consideration. But careful consideration was already required before concatenating N-Triples 1.1 files with each other (because of blank nodes). > We suggest clarifying the behaviour when mixing N-Triples data that declares different versions, e.g., 1.2, 1.2-basic, and 1.1. Good point, see w3c/rdf-turtle#118 We will also address https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/1159#issuecomment-3671161845 and w3c/rdf-n-triples#84 . -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/1161#issuecomment-3673956332 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: <w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/1161/3673956332@github.com>
Received on Friday, 19 December 2025 07:43:51 UTC