On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 2:50 PM, Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>wrote: > > > > Questions: > > > > 1. I do not see any issues off hand for moving Turtle forward. What is > next? > > could you ask on the LinkedData list, or find some way of getting people > there to vote? Well turtle support will get full support I believe, > but the more difficult question is after that should one drop RDF/XML as a > must > support? Or should one have both? I don't find it difficult to do both. > We should leave RDF/XML as a MUST (on verifier side), even for all its cons, most libs support it (I don't know of any RDF lib which support Turtle but RDF/XML for example). If anything, we could simply remove the ugly RDF/XML snippet from the spec. > > > > 2. The examples page in the wiki lists Turtle and N3 in one section > > (for somewhat obvious reasons). Should the proposal include the two > > together?) > > I like N3, but there are too few good parsers for it sadly (many that > claim to be N3 parsers are not). I think it's time is still to come. > And so I'd love to mention it, but more as an aside. > -1. I don't see what mentioning N3 would bring aside from confusion. N3's subset Turtle is all we need (for the reasons Henry and I mentioned in previous emails). Steph. > > > > > > -Patrick > > > > Social Web Architect > http://bblfish.net/ > > >
Received on Friday, 23 December 2011 05:45:15 UTC