Re: FEATURE: SPARQLX

On 31 Mar 2009, at 12:30, Orri Erling wrote:
[snip]
> Hi
>
> The SPARQLX syntax seems preferable, it is just a transliteration  
> of a parse
> tree.  It can do the nesting that occurs in expressions and the  
> like without
> blank nodes, can keep arguments of functions in order without numbered
> predicates or RDF lists and so on.  Plus XSLT  applies.
>
> Since this is really straightforward once there is a final syntax,  
> this can
> be a best practice and whoever needs it can make an XSLT sheet  
> generating
> SPARQL.  This does not per se have to  be in the rec.  It can be a non
> normative reference in it and the whole syntax can be expressed in  
> some
> other document.

The main thing is to provide a Schema and a Namspace. The Schema  
should provide useful types so that one can construct schema aware  
queries.

I'm happy with this being in a separate document. Is there any  
problem making it a rec track document?

Cheers,
Bijan.