Skip to content

Conversation

jeswr
Copy link
Collaborator

@jeswr jeswr commented Mar 24, 2023

Supercedes #319

@RubenVerborgh
Copy link
Member

Given #330, maybe this could become:

const writer3 = new N3.Writer({ syntax: 'flexible' }); // Also output quads that cannot be expressed in the chosen syntax (default)
const writer4 = new N3.Writer({ syntax: 'drop' });     // Drop components or quads that cannot be expressed in the chosen syntax
const writer5 = new N3.Writer({ graphs: 'strict' });   // Throws an error when a quad cannot be expressed in the chosen syntax

@jeswr
Copy link
Collaborator Author

jeswr commented Mar 24, 2023

Should we add proper validation to writer at the same time (e.g. for the cases in #330)?

@RubenVerborgh
Copy link
Member

Yes, that's the direction. But we don't need to have that right now; i.e., this can be the meaning of the strict option, and not validating everything can be a bug until fixed.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants