- From: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 12:08:17 +0100
- To: andy.seaborne@hp.com
- Cc: public-cwm-talk@w3.org
On Tue, 31 May 2005 10:26:44 +0100, "Seaborne, Andy" <andy.seaborne@hp.com> wrote: <snip /> > Neither Turtle nor SPARQL have property paths either which is more > of an omission. > > :: n3.n3 :: > path cfg:mustBeOneSequence( > ( node pathtail ) > ). > > pathtail cfg:mustBeOneSequence( > ( ) > ( "!" path ) > ( "^" path ) > ). > :: n3.n3 :: > > which, in practice, would be useful (that is, I wanted them for > something I was doing yesterday!) I don't think that fits well with the current set of turtle design which is in the terminology of triples. Yes, I know this is more shortcuts but I find it below the barrier of what I think most people want. > > PS When might there be a Turtle note? There's no timeline. I don't think the DAWG or other WG has agreed to do this formally. I brought this up on this list in February: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-cwm-talk/2005JanMar/0029.html but the response was just about syntax detail. <snip /> Dave
Received on Tuesday, 31 May 2005 11:09:31 UTC