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

Re: Syntax issues, UNION and MINUS

From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@talis.com>
Date: Tue, 06 Jul 2010 21:26:42 +0100
Message-ID: <4C339182.9070606@talis.com>
To: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Hearing no suggestions, I've reset the grammar to have SPARQL 1.0 style 
UNION, that is left-hand side requires {}.  The problem is that empty 
patterns exist (e.g. { OPTIONAL {...} } has an empty left-hand side.).

	Andy

On 14/06/2010 12:27 PM, Andy Seaborne wrote:
...
> We discussed enabling a simpler form of UNION which might look like:
>
> { X UNION {Y} }
>
> omitting the {} on the LHS.
>
> To be fully compatible with SPARQL 1.0
>
> { {A} B UNION {C} }
>
> is still :
> join(
>    A
>    union(B,C)
>      )
>
> [Caution: There is a bug in the current SPARQL 1.1 grammar here]
Received on Tuesday, 6 July 2010 20:27:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:43 GMT