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

Re: SPARQL 2004-10-12 syntax and grammar issues

From: Steve Harris <S.W.Harris@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 01:46:47 +0000
To: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20041111014647.GG8296@login.ecs.soton.ac.uk>

On Tue, Nov 09, 2004 at 10:14:53 +0000, Andy Seaborne wrote:
> Steve Harris wrote:
> >On Mon, Nov 08, 2004 at 02:50:36PM -0000, Andy Seaborne wrote:
> >
> >>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/0199.html
> >>
> >>>waiting for the editors to announce if there are any document changes.
> >>>I don't actually see any decision in the last telcon minutes
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/0210.html
> >>
> >>All three.  Or just # (c.f. common in scripting languages).
> >
> >
> >+1 for just #
> 
> If you are happy with that, I propose just "#" for comments.
> 
> In the telecon I thought you were making the case for /**/ comments.

No, that may have been someone else. I'd like there to be one type, but I
dont really care which.

My feeling is still that fewer syntax variations make the language easier
to learn.

- Steve
Received on Thursday, 11 November 2004 01:46:53 GMT

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