Sorting Turtle output?

[ajnelson-nist]

Hi all, probably esp. @nicholascar,

PR 1425 added the ttl2 serializer, which since became longturtle. One of the goals was to reduce Git difference noise.

I unfortunately find that most of the noise in Git diffs comes from Turtle output not being sorted. This is an effect both on nodes with IRIs and with blank nodes that (if I'm guessing right) may be sorting based on their skolemized IDs.

Could an option to either of the Turtle serializers be added to sort the output, for those willing to pay the .serialize time cost? I personally like Git-tracking demonstration results, so in many of my uses I'm willing to pay the time cost of sorting graphs.

[aucampia]

Would be happy with such an option, and it would be useful with other formats also. My only concern is that our current approach for adding options (i.e. using **kwargs) is a bit adhoc - it would be nice to consider an option that provides validation and type safety somehow.

it would be nice to consider an option that provides validation

Assuming you mean validation of URIs, informed opinion on stackoverflow is that URI validation is best left to a dedicated library so that would suggest the necessity of acquiring a dependency but I guess that can be handled via the pip extras mechanism.

[aucampia]

it would be nice to consider an option that provides validation

No I mean that provides a way to validate the options independently, maybe something like:

plugins.get("json-ld", Serializer).make_opts(...) -> JSONLDOptions

and then make it possible to pass serializer options into serialize

not entirely sure it is that critical though.

No I mean that provides a way to validate the options independently.. and then make it possible to pass serializer options into serialize

Ah, so. Yes, that would address the needs of those wishing to exert more control over the JSONLD serializer.

[ajnelson-nist]

Interesting. I had thought that typing for keyword arguments would be compatible with a **kwargs pass-through, but it seems at least with mypy that's not the case. Here are some notes in case others thought like I did.

The following program runs fine through Python, print 3. It passes mypy --strict review. But it includes what look like to me to be three type errors (f() for 4--6). Python 3.8.9, mypy 0.950.

#!/usr/bin/env python3

# This software was developed at the National Institute of Standards
# and Technology by employees of the Federal Government in the course
# of their official duties. Pursuant to title 17 Section 105 of the
# United States Code this software is not subject to copyright
# protection and is in the public domain. NIST assumes no
# responsibility whatsoever for its use by other parties, and makes
# no guarantees, expressed or implied, about its quality,
# reliability, or any other characteristic.
#
# We would appreciate acknowledgement if the software is used.

from typing import Any


def g(x: int, *args: Any, y: str = "", **kwargs: Any) -> None:
    if y == "a":
        print(x)


def f(x: int, *args: Any, **kwargs: Any) -> None:
    g(x, *args, **kwargs)


f(1)
f(2, True)
f(3, True, y="a")
f(4, True, y=True)
f(5, True, y=77)
f(6, True, y=b"c")

If another keyword parameter is added to f, mypy does test as I expected. So, turning f into this:

def f(x: int, *args: Any, z: str = "", **kwargs: Any) -> None:
    g(x, *args, **kwargs)

and adding this last call for f triggers a mypy failure as expected:

f(7, True, y=b"c", z=4444)

Summarizing for my original request: if the "front"-most serialize call (Graph.serialize?) could get a sort keyword argument, it looks more like the value can be type-tested. But if a sort keyword argument is only added into specific serializers, its input won't be type-checked.

Or, I'm totally missing something else with how the serializer plugin framework handles things. Please do note if that's so, I haven't reviewed that code in depth.

[ajnelson-nist]

Some work I'm doing would benefit from seeing this implemented. So, to resume this conversation, I've filed PR 1978.

I have a general question on the API for Graph.serialize and its intermediary functions down through the plugins folder: Is there a reason most, but not all, of the function signatures don't currently use the *args positional-argument parameter that delimits where keyword arguments start?

I've personally found it difficult to understand when arguments in functions are specified as positional with defaults, versus being keyword arguments, when there isn't a *args or just * used to draw a separating line in the list. I think it would help type system review if explicit *args were added to the .serialize() functions, to make clear that sort: bool = False is a with-default-value keyword argument.

In case the motivation of this question is unclear, Patch 2 in PR 1978 tries adding sort=False to Graph.serialize's signatures, downstream through the Turtle serializer.

The PR also leaves open some question of what would be expected of some sort-order matters. Blank node sorting seems to be a tricky topic that may involve recursion to solve. Prefixes that sort differently from expanded IRIs isn't in the unit test, but will also be worth clarifying with the hard-coded graph serialization. Feedback is welcome.

[tgbugs]

FYI you might be interested in https://github.com/tgbugs/pyontutils/tree/master/ttlser and https://github.com/tgbugs/pyontutils/blob/master/ttlser/docs/ttlser.md.

[ajnelson-nist]

@tgbugs Thank you for the reference! I see it is in a many-utilities repository. Is your vision that that code be something you continue to maintain in your code base, or instead to be something that integrates into, or overrides, the associated PR 1978? I'm fine with not reliving the whole "Hack, hack, oh we need a spec." experience, and I knew at least blank node handling was going to need some degree of style spec.