W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > October to December 2004

Re: Draft: open issues around '?' use.

From: Kendall Clark <kendall@monkeyfist.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 10:00:42 -0400
To: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
Cc: Dirk-Willem van Gulik <dirkx@webweaving.org>, public-rdf-dawg@w3.org
Message-ID: <20041025140042.GA18014@monkeyfist.com>

On Mon, Oct 25, 2004 at 02:53:46PM +0100, Dave Beckett wrote:
> 
> I find your description of the problems as evidence to consider a change.

I find it very uncompelling evidence, frankly.

> As far as I know, that is possible.  QNames must have a : in them, all
> other names could be variable names.  However, that would not make
> them stand out in the syntax - which is useful for reading them

Very -1 for not distinguishing variables syntactically by giving them
a leading character. iTQL doesn't do this, and hence I find reading
lots of it very frustratingl.

> > -> 	Replace the '?' by a '$' or '_' or at the very least allow the use
> > 	of a '$' or '_' as a synomym for the '?'.
> 
> I could support either replacing ? with $ or allowing both.  My
> slight preference is for replacing ? with $, neutral to negative on
> having both.

-1 on replacing "?" with "$". +1 on allowing both.

> -1 to those; don't say 'variable' to me.

Agree.

Best,
Kendall Clark
-- 
And you have never been in love until you've seen 
sunlight thrown over smashed human bone. --Morrissey
Received on Monday, 25 October 2004 14:01:07 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:21 GMT