Re: Blank Nodes and SPARQL

Eric Prud'hommeaux wrote:
> 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.
>

Serql has the capability now, and apparently Jena has had api solution
involving prebinding (not sure how long this has been around).

When we first started this conversation, I was in agreement with you -
that if we found a non-conflicting solution that it would be enough to
postpone it until SPARQL 2.  However, during the course of the
discussion I've seen enough incompatible ideas already in use that I
think a consensus on the issue would be a very Good Thing.


-Ron