W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > January to March 2010

Re: Syntax of MINUS

From: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 10:59:38 +0100
Cc: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <4BFFBA3F-CC47-4C60-99CC-6C03A79AD554@garlik.com>
To: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@talis.com>
Marginal preference for the latter, as it's visually more like OPTIONAL, which is a close relative of MINUS.

- Steve

On 2010-03-31, at 09:13, Andy Seaborne wrote:

> Should the syntax of MINUS be like UNION with {} on the left-hand side
> 
> { { ?s a foaf:Person
>    ?s foaf:name ?name
>  }
>  MINUS
>  { ?s foaf:knows ?other }
> }
> 
> or without:
> 
> { ?s a foaf:Person .
>  ?s foaf:name ?name .
>  MINUS { ?s foaf:name ?name }
> }
> 
> Either works from a grammar point of view.
> 
> 	Andy
> 

-- 
Steve Harris, Garlik Limited
1-3 Halford Road, Richmond, TW10 6AW, UK
+44 20 8439 8200  http://www.garlik.com/
Registered in England and Wales 535 7233 VAT # 849 0517 11
Registered office: Thames House, Portsmouth Road, Esher, Surrey, KT10 9AD
Received on Wednesday, 31 March 2010 10:00:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:42 GMT