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


From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 14:11:37 +0100
Message-Id: <BE15AAE9-9551-441A-B75F-20480F386E2E@cs.man.ac.uk>
Cc: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
To: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>

Sorry, I misread what Jorge wrote. bound does change results, etc. He  
was just saying that if, to eliminate NAF, you want to get rid of ! 
bound or OPTIONAL, he much prefers optional.

I don't think Axel was suggesting at all that we get ride of the NAF  
in SPARQL, just that we make it clear and easily accessible via a  
better syntactic construct.

I personally am open to removing it, but believe that if we include  
it, then there's no point in not making it nicely accessible, and,  
indeed, some points against not doing so.

Received on Tuesday, 12 September 2006 13:11:42 UTC

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