- From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@talis.com>
- Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 15:14:20 +0100
- To: Lee Feigenbaum <lee@thefigtrees.net>
- CC: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On 12/04/2010 2:09 PM, Lee Feigenbaum wrote: > We're chartered to include dedicated constructs for expressing negation > -- not specifically to handle the same cases handled by OPTIONAL/!bound. > I'm not motivated to provide a shortcut for cases that can be handled by > OPTIONAL/!bound yet for which there's no evidence of usefulness. > ...especially not at what I consider the cost of reasonable language > design. > > Lee Not exactly the same cases, I agree, but OPTIONAL/!BOUND is mentioned specifically in the charter, and in F&R under "motivations" and so I think it's a reasonable target usecase. I'm not willing to say that specific usages are or are not used because it is so widely implemented. You can do set interestion with OPTIONAL/!BOUND. The phase I charter talks about multiple, interoperable implementations. Andy
Received on Monday, 12 April 2010 14:14:57 UTC