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

Re: draft responce JG-1 (comments on functions and LET)

From: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 20:42:16 +0000
Cc: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>, SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <25FC80B0-3AD0-4C16-9773-5BB8DEC48D25@garlik.com>
To: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
I still find myself typing , between select expressions, but you can put that down to SQL-induced brain damage.

BIND(expr1 AS ?x, expr2 AS ?y) without SELECT expr1 AS ?x, expr2 AS ?y would seem strange (and GROUP/ORDER BY etc).

BIND(expr1 AS ?x) BIND(expr2 AS ?y) with SELECT (expr1 AS ?x) (expr2 AS ?y) seems OK, given that the alternative is parser nastiness.

- Steve

On 2010-11-17, at 15:12, Andy Seaborne wrote:

> Observation, not proposal:
> 
> BIND (expr1 AS ?x, expr2 AS ?y) would work
> 
> BIND (expr1 AS ?x) is more like the use in SELECT to me - each named expression value is enclosed in ().
> 
> Or change SELECT as well.
> 
> I don't see this as important.
> 
> 	Andy
> 
> On 17/11/10 14:54, Axel Polleres wrote:
>> alright, changed response draft respectively...
>> check http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/CommentResponse:JG-1
>> 
>> Axel
>> 
>> 
>> On 17 Nov 2010, at 14:49, Andy Seaborne wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 17/11/10 11:35, Steve Harris wrote:
>>>> On 2010-11-17, at 11:28, Axel Polleres wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 17 Nov 2010, at 11:15, Steve Harris wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Seems fine, but is it BIND() BIND() or BIND() ()?
>>>>> 
>>>>> not sure as I couldn't find it in the grammar yet, Andy?
>>>>> (I have no strong feelings on either)
>>>> 
>>>> BIND() BIND() might leave more syntax options open in the future, but no strong preference.
>>> 
>>> BIND is exactly:
>>> 
>>> BIND(expr AS ?var)
>>> 
>>> A trailing optional expression will have lookahead problems with RDF
>>> list which also starts "("
>>> 
>>>         Andy
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> - Steve
>>>> 
>>>>>> It's probably right, just checking the response is correct.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> - Steve
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 2010-11-17, at 10:42, Axel Polleres wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I put up a draft response for
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2010Nov/0005.html
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/CommentResponse:JG-1
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Let me know whether you're ok with that or whether you think whether we should wait until BIND is specified further in the draft.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Axel
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Steve Harris, CTO, Garlik Limited
>>>>>> 1-3 Halford Road, Richmond, TW10 6AW, UK
>>>>>> +44 20 8439 8203  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
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 

-- 
Steve Harris, CTO, Garlik Limited
1-3 Halford Road, Richmond, TW10 6AW, UK
+44 20 8439 8203  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, 17 November 2010 20:42:52 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:44 GMT