Re: [Gzz] ``canon3_file_format``: A canonical, N3-based file format

[Tuukka Hastrup]

On Tue, 1 Apr 2003, Benja Fallenstein wrote:
> The ``NEWLINE`` token may be any of CR, LF, and CRLF.
> (This is necessary for CVS to be useful across platforms.)

Does Unicode "Normalization Form 3" allow for this?

> In contexts where the specific form used matters,
> the newline character is LF. (In particular, when computing
> a content hash-- e.g., when creating a Canon3 Storm block.)


> The triples must be ordered. Two triples are compared
> by comparing their subjects, properties, and objects
> in this order. Each of these parts is compared
> as follows:

Wouldn't it be easier to produce the serialization format for each triple, 
and then put those into lexical order? Or if the parts must be compared 
separately, could we compare serializations of those parts?

> ``URIref`` is a URI reference as defined in [RFC 2396].
> Percent escapes (e.g. ``%2f``) should preferably
> be encoded in lower case. URIref may be either of the following:

"Must be encoded" in case of Storm?

> 1. An absolute URI (e.g., ``http://example.org/``).
> 2. An absolute URI plus a fragment identifier
>     (e.g., ``http://example.org/#foo``).
> 3. The empty URI reference (which is a relative URI
>     refering to the current document).
> 4. A standalone fragment identifier (e.g., ``#foo``),
>     refering to a fragment of the current document.

Could there be problems with case of the fragment identifier as well? And 
should we require some canonicalization of the URIs?


Just wondering,
Tuukka

-- 
-- Trying to catch me? Just follow up my Electric Fingerprints
-- To help you: address@hidden
                http://www.iki.fi/Tuukka.Hastrup/
                IRCNet: Stugge/tuukkah @#pii,#gzz,#ynna
                Jabber ID: address@hidden, ICQ #11321669