Re: Survey for media-type evolution

I can confirm that the current version of dotNetRDF also processes these
resources without an issue.

Cheers

Kal

On Fri, 14 Feb 2025, 10:36 am Pierre-Antoine Champin, <pierre-antoine@w3.org>
wrote:

> Dear Semantic Web community,
>
> TL/DR: do your RDF tools encounter problems when loading the following
> resources?
>
>   https://perso.liris.cnrs.fr/pierre-antoine.champin/index.nt
>   https://perso.liris.cnrs.fr/pierre-antoine.champin/index.rdf
>   https://perso.liris.cnrs.fr/pierre-antoine.champin/index.ttl
>
> -----
>
> As many of you know, the W3C RDF-Star Working Group [1] is currently
> extending the RDF abstract syntax and the corresponding serialization
> formats. A long standing question that we have to respond is whether we
> should change the media types of the formats, or keep them for the new
> versions of the format [2,3].
>
> A middle-way was discussed yesterday by the Working Group [4], consisting
> in adding a 'version' parameter to the media-types, e.g.
> 'text/turtle;version=1.2'. The goal of this email is *not* to discus the
> merits and drawbacks of this approach, but to check an assumption that some
> of us have, namely:
>
>     Despite the fact that the current media-types do not support the
> version parameter currently, its presence will be gracefully ignored by
> current implementation.
>
> To test this hypothesis, I have added such a version parameter on
> different versions of my own FOAF profile, and I have checked that the
> following tools load from these URLs without any trouble:
>
> - sophia-cli (https://github.com/pchampin/sophia-cli)
> - rapper 2.0.16 (https://librdf.org/)
> - Jena RIOT 5.2.0 (https://jena.apache.org/)
> - Ruby RDF command line tool 3.3.2 (https://ruby-rdf.github.io/)
> - Python RDFlib 7.1.1 (https://rdflib.readthedocs.io/en/stable/ -- via
> the method Graph.parse)
>
> It would be great if we could collectively extend this list, to assess how
> disruptive (if at all) the use of the 'version' parameter would be on
> legacy implementations. Please respond to this email with your own
> experiment.
>
>   thanks in advance,
>   pa
>
>
> PS: let me emphasize again that, if you want to discuss the pros and cons
> of this solution, you should contribute to [3], but do *not* do it in
> response to this email, to keep the thread focus on the survey itself :)
>
> [1] https://www.w3.org/groups/wg/rdf-star
> [2] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/semantic-web/2025Jan/0015.html
> [3] https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/141
> [4] https://www.w3.org/2025/02/13-rdf-star-minutes.html#fc3f
>