- From: Art Barstow <barstow@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2001 09:13:01 -0400
- To: Louis Theran <theran@cs.umass.edu>
- Cc: www-rdf-comments@w3.org
On Mon, Sep 24, 2001 at 05:00:28PM -0400, Louis Theran wrote: > > As described by http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/WD-rdf-testcases-20010912/, > the ntriples syntax seems designed to discourage automated testing. > ntriples is supposed to enable a ``set of machine-processable test > cases corresponding to technical issues addressed by the WG.'' If > this is really the case, then comments, variable amounts of > whitespace and multiple kinds of line separators aren't appropriate, > since the best oracle for automated compatibility testing is straight > byte comparison (e.g., UNIX cmp). A problem with straight byte comparison is that it won't handle bNodes (aka anonymous nodes). N-Triples does not define how a processor will generate the name part of a bNode. I expect graph matching programs, such as cwm [1] or Euler [2], to be useful in determining if two sets of N-Triples are equivalent. [1] http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/ [2] http://www.agfa.com/w3c/euler/ However, I think the WG should consider adding a simple graph comparison algorithm in future revisions of this WD. Art Barstow ---
Received on Tuesday, 25 September 2001 09:13:02 UTC