Re: Comments on WD-rdf-testcases-20010912

* Dave Beckett wrote:
>> The specification should clearly state that four characters must follow
>> the \u and eight characters the \U. ...
>I thought that was what we wrote:
>  \uxxxx      Hexadecimal digits xxxx encoding character ...
>  \Uxxxxxxxx  Hexadecimal digits xxxxxxxx encoding character ...

That leaves out whether x represents an optional or a required digit...

>[U+10FFFF vs. 0xFFFFFFFF]
>It doesn't say we should exclude code points beyond that range.

Code points beyond U+10FFFF are invalid. I've posted a comment on this
to the mailing list...

>It is easier to have a fixed size field, since this is meant to be a
>simple format; which is why we require absolute URIs, line-by-line
>handling and other simple structures.  Furthermore, it should be
>useful to retain the chance to expand this field later to encode the
>32 bits if Unicode grew to require that (and there is plenty of
>growth there).

N-Triples should allow characters that can't be represented in RDF?
I don't think so.

>> I _really_ wonder why #20, #3C and #3E should be additionally allowed
>> for absoluteURIs. They have to be URI-escaped, the WD implies I should
>> use
>> instead of 
>> That's IMO pure nonsense.
>It is not nonsense

Unescaping the above string results in an invalid URI reference, thus...

>- it has a meaning - but as I say above, given the
>requirements of CHARMOD in this area, I expect we will change to the
>second example.  Those particular characters are escaped since they
>were used in the syntax: 
>  uriref ::= '<' absoluteURI '>'

As I said, absoluteURI should be the absoluteURI in RFC 2396 as updated
by RFC 2732. The characters ' ', '<' and '>' must not appear literally
inside an absoluteURI.

>> I don't see no need for the trailing '.' character required for each
>> n-triple line.
>This is compatibility with the existing N3 format
>which remains useful to retain.

Well, Notation3 is underspecified... refer to my recent comments on if you like.

>This N-Triples format is meant to be simple, complete format for
>encoding RDF graphs, compatible with existing tools and is proving
>very useful in our work.

Maybe it would be a good idea to change the name of the Working Draft to
"N-Triples and RDF Test Cases" if it is meant to formally specify
Björn Höhrmann { }
am Badedeich 7 } Telefon: +49(0)4667/981028 {
25899 Dagebüll { PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 }

Received on Tuesday, 18 September 2001 15:49:37 UTC