RE: [TF-PP] Possible starting points

> 1/ Property paths only mention IRIs or prefixed names.

+1

My preference is to do (1) for now, leaving open the other possibilities as being a bit too early.  Nothing should be designed out in terms of syntax.

> 2/ Property paths with variables and IRIs or prefixed names.

0
Worried about how long it will take but it is useful.

> 3/ With access to the length of the path matched

-1
The multiple paths between the same node looks like it would raise many issues so too early.
Can live with though.

> 4/ With access to the path matched (path-valued variables is one
> possibility)

-1 
Too complicated for a time permitting feature.

> 5/ A mechanism that will allow a variety of path matching schemes, and
> provide one such system.

0

> 6/ Do nothing in this round - too early to standardise.

-1
I believe 1 is doable and worthwhile.

	Andy