W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > April to June 2006

Re: Blank node identifiers in FILTER clauses

From: Kendall Clark <kendall@monkeyfist.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 08:32:10 -0400
Message-Id: <5ADA5792-0E4F-473C-BB86-9E009782526B@monkeyfist.com>
Cc: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
To: Jeen Broekstra <jeen@aduna.biz>

On Jun 28, 2006, at 5:15 AM, Jeen Broekstra wrote:

> I can live with either of these and have a slight preference for the
> second. To be honest I could live without the blank nodes in queries
> altogether. They are confusing and annoying (this discussion is a case
> in point), and I find the supposed 'cut&paste' benefit  
> unconvincing. But
> that station is passed I guess.

I couldn't agree more. I wasn't convinced by it as a reason, offered  
by TimBL, for turtleizing our syntax, and I'm even less
convinced by it now. It's the biggest single wart on SPARQL and I  
wish we could chop it off w/out mercy.

But I'm also not convinced that it's too late. If the WG decides to  
do it, and will put in the work to make it happen,
then it's "merely" a matter of doing the work.

Received on Wednesday, 28 June 2006 12:47:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:00:51 UTC