- From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
- Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 12:06:33 +0200
- To: "ext Eric Prud'hommeaux" <eric@w3.org>
- Cc: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org
On Mar 24, 2004, at 00:24, ext Eric Prud'hommeaux wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 09:27:38AM +0200, Patrick Stickler wrote: >> >> On Mar 23, 2004, at 06:41, ext Eric Prud'hommeaux wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> While the content selection/site description communities may not need >>> all of regular expressions, historically, they have made use of >>> substrings ala $uri =~ m/http:\/\/playboy\.com\/pictures.*/ >> >> I'm sorry, but I don't understand the significance of this comment. >> Are >> you saying regular expression comparison is a bad thing because some >> folks might do bad things with it? Or are you saying it's a good thing >> because it allows folks to do things they already do and find useful? > > the latter. It was supposed to be without value judgement, just an > observation that there are folks who have a need for a subset of that > expressivity. Right. That was why I had included it in RDFQ in the first place, and why I offered a use case for it. We've also had "fringe" applications that need to break the best practice of URI opacity for very special purposes, so having a standardized way to do that is I think a good thing. Patrick -- Patrick Stickler Nokia, Finland patrick.stickler@nokia.com
Received on Wednesday, 24 March 2004 05:23:34 UTC