W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > June 2003

Re: Post-last-call comments on N-Triples notation

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: 30 Jun 2003 15:50:21 -0500
To: Martin Duerst <duerst@w3.org>
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org, w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org
Message-Id: <1057006221.24287.1681.camel@dirk.dm93.org>

[I'm not sure why these went to w3c-rdfcore-wg
rather than to www-rdf-comments, but I presume it's
in order to discuss them here until I hear otherwise
from the chair.]

On Mon, 2003-06-30 at 15:16, Martin Duerst wrote:
> Dear RDF WG,
> I'm writing this email to discharge two action items, one from
> the I18N WG and another from the MIT team meeting.
> Both of these action items relate to N-Triples.
>  From the I18N WG
> ----------------
> [Compared with the other issues that are currently being discussed,
> this may be a detail]
> The I18N WG (Core TF) has looked at the escaping conventions
> for N-Triples at http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-testcases/#ntrip_strings.
> We do not think it is a good idea to have more escaping than
> necessary.

It doesn't have more than necessary.

The amount of escaping it has was necessary in order to use
n-triples for its intended purpose of building a test suite;
in particular, in WG email, where various mail software conspires
to make US-ASCII the only thing we can rely on.

>  This only introduces additional uncertainties.
> It would be better if N-Triples used UTF-8 directly, therewith
> not testing any escaping conventions, but only the actual RDF
> statements and entailments.
>  From the MIT team meeting
> -------------------------
> The question came up from a team member whether there was a
> difference between N-Triples and N3. It was pointed out that
> a quite probable way to read "N3" is as 'n-triple' (rather than
> as 'n-three'). It was suggested that choosing a different name
> than N-Triple would avoid (or would have avoided) such kinds
> of confusion.

I dunno what the cost of renaming n-triples would be.
I don't have a strong opinion.

> Personal comment: Both of the above comments seem to at least
>                    point to the need for a strong warning
>                    "Warning: N-Triples in not N3".
> Regards,    Martin.

Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Monday, 30 June 2003 16:50:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:24:23 UTC