W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-cwm-talk@w3.org > January to March 2006

SPARQL grammar... in BNF? N3?

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2006 09:40:11 -0600
To: Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org>, Yosi Scharf <syosi@MIT.EDU>
Cc: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>, public-cwm-talk@w3.org, Robert Crowell <crowell@MIT.EDU>
Message-Id: <1139413211.12577.236.camel@dirk.w3.org>

Yosi, Tim, Eric,

The SPARQL parser in cwm... it seems to be built from EricP's
BNF...


|    if web:
|        File = urllib.urlopen('http://www.w3.org/2005/01/yacker/uploads/sparqlTest/bnf')
 -- http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/sparql/sparql-grammar.py

In the DAWG, the editors added a .jj version of the grammar
and are considering what other formats to publish.
  http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/rq23/parsers/sparql.jj
  <- http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/rq23/parsers/
  <- http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/rq23/#sparqlGrammar

Is BNF the one we want/need?

EricP, have you generated a turtle/n3 version of the SPARQL grammar?

Yosi, what's the status of N3 parsers based on n3.n3? Do they
work yet? What about using that approach for the SPARQL parser?

-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Wednesday, 8 February 2006 15:40:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:11:02 GMT