Re: [core] [T2TRG] Review of CoRAL

[Klaus Hartke <[e-mail]>]

Christian Amsüss wrote:
> > The draft currently specifies that a base IRI is resolved against the
> > current context IRI, not the previous base IRI.
>
> Thanks; likewise, I missed updating the current relation number. Both
> being fixed.

I just checked how Turtle does it, and it seems that in Turtle a base
IRI is resolved against the previous base IRI. The difference is as
follows:

Document without base IRIs:

    item <foo/a>
    item <foo/b>
    item <bar/c>
    item <bar/d>

Document with base IRIs relative to context IRI:

    #base <foo/>
    item <a>
    item <b>
    #base <bar/>
    item <c>
    item <d>

Advantage: Since link targets are more likely to be relative to the
context than to the previous link targets, this should generate
slightly more compact CBOR representations.

Document with base IRIs relative to previous base IRI:

    #base <foo/>
    item <a>
    item <b>
    #base <../bar/>
    item <c>
    item <d>

Advantages: Since the context IRI is not used after the first base IRI
directive, a processor can reuse the memory for the context IRI to
store the base IRI instead of having to allocate memory for both. It
would match the intuition of people who are familiar with Turtle.

Would it make sense to switch?

Klaus