- From: Arjohn Kampman <arjohn.kampman@aduna.biz>
- Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 10:15:42 +0100
- To: www-rdf-comments@w3.org
Dear editors of the RDF Test Cases document, Last week, we stumbled across a problem in Sesame when RDF was read from an RDF/XML document and then written as N-Triples. The problem was related to the bNode identifiers, whose definition in RDF/XML and N-Triples is slightly different: While parsing the RDF/XML, the parser generated bNode IDs that were legal according to the RDF/XML specs and these were written as-is to the N-Triples document. An example bNode identifier is "node09FC-1E4A-2". In RDF/XML, the dashes (and underscores, etc.) are legal characters for bNode identifiers. In N-Triples, however, only (ASCII-)letters and number can be used. Thus the procedure sketched out above resulted in an illegal N-Triples document. So, my question is: wouldn't it be convenient to make the two definitions identical? Regards, Arjohn Kampman -- arjohn.kampman@aduna.biz Aduna B.V. (formerly known as aidministrator) - http://www.aduna.biz/ prinses julianaplein 14-b, 3817 cs amersfoort, the netherlands tel. +31-(0)33-4659987 fax. +31-(0)33-4659987
Received on Tuesday, 28 October 2003 04:32:46 UTC