W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > January to March 2005

Re: Minor Syntax issues

From: Steve Harris <S.W.Harris@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 18:04:08 +0000
To: "'RDF Data Access Working Group'" <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20050215180408.GP8916@login.ecs.soton.ac.uk>

On Tue, Feb 15, 2005 at 05:26:36PM +0000, Andy Seaborne wrote:
> >Quick predication: this reminds me of the popular C typo relating if to
> >blocks, ie. the difference between
> >
> >	SELECT ?name ?email ?phone
> >	WHERE (?x e:worksFor <e:companyX>)
> >	      OPTIONAL{(?x e:emailAddress ?email)
> >		       (?x e:phoneNumber ?phone)}
> >and
> >	SELECT ?name ?email ?phone
> >	WHERE (?x e:worksFor <e:companyX>)
> >	      OPTIONAL (?x e:emailAddress ?email)
> >		       (?x e:phoneNumber ?phone)
> >
> >I suspect it will catch people out the same way. Not a huge problem though.
> >
> >- Steve
> >
> 
> Good point.  There is an argument for always requiring {}

Well, except that makes the syntax anoyingly non-regular, I dont want to
have to do GRAPH ?g { (?s ?p ?o) } all the time either. Yes, I do want
both internal and external cake :)
 
> ARQ will print parsed queries as fully bracketted and indented.
> 
> Eclipse plugin and Emacs mode for SPARQL needed!

+ a vim syntax file of course.
 
> PS <e:companyX> -- ???

Oops, still not used to ommiting the <>'s, it will come.

- Steve
Received on Tuesday, 15 February 2005 18:04:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:22 GMT