RE: N3 and N-Triples (was: RDF in HTML: Approaches)

• From: Joshua Allen <joshuaa@microsoft.com>
• Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2002 20:43:38 -0700
• To: Bill de hÓra <dehora@eircom.net>, <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
• Message-ID: <4F4182C71C1FDD4BA0937A7EB7B8B4C105535CC4@red-msg-08.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>

> I disagree XML in itself is the sticking point. The thing to do is
> beat on the XML syntax until it's as simple as RDF is supposed to
> be.

I'm just curious; what exactly is wrong with n-triples?  I can understand if people want to serialize the triples as XML, but that is trivial.  It seems that n-triples is exactly "as simple as RDF is supposed to be".

(Or, look at it another way: n-triples is preferred for achieving repeatable and comparable tests across processors -- which sounds a lot like the definition of "canonical" to me.)

Received on Monday, 3 June 2002 23:45:06 UTC