Re: Blank Nodes and SPARQL

On Sun, Jul 10, 2005 at 10:04:19PM -0400, Ron Alford wrote:
> 
> After consulting with the lab, we have decided that the namespace
> splitting proposal (_!:...) is the best way to deal with the use cases
> that have been brought up.

Given that the grammar does not assign any conflicting meaning to
_!:..., would postponing this to SPARQL 2 acceptable?

Before you answer, allow me to lead the question a little: none of the
query languages we surveyed have this capability.

> While we believe that the protocol prebinding is nice and generally
> useful, we would prefer a syntax level solution to the bnode problem.
> 
> The function extension (ext:bnodelabel) comes in a distant third.  It
> adds annoying overhead to templating queries.  We were also concerned
> with how well implementations will deal with function extensions.
> 
> So I drop my original comment suggestions in favor of either namespace
> splitting or prebinding.  The function extensions have yet to convince
> me, but there's still room.
> 
> 
> Finally, I'd like to thank Amy Alford, Kendall Clark, and Bijan Parsia
> for all their help and input into this issue.  I'd also like to thank
> the members of the dawg who've been so responsive to this issue both on
> the list and in IRC.
> 
> -Ron



-- 
-eric

office: +81.466.49.1170 W3C, Keio Research Institute at SFC,
                        Shonan Fujisawa Campus, Keio University,
                        5322 Endo, Fujisawa, Kanagawa 252-8520
                        JAPAN
        +1.617.258.5741 NE43-344, MIT, Cambridge, MA 02144 USA
cell:   +81.90.6533.3882

(eric@w3.org)
Feel free to forward this message to any list for any purpose other than
email address distribution.