- From: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
- Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2012 14:22:33 +0100
- To: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
- Cc: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org
On 2012-04-02, at 09:16, Andy Seaborne wrote:
>
>
> On 01/04/12 21:32, Polleres, Axel wrote:
>> 6) change the semantics of * and + only, leave everything else as in LC, cf.
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2012JanMar/0285.html
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2012JanMar/0286.html
>> - Requires a new last call
>> - May lead to formal objections within the working group?
>> ± unsure whether it addresses commenters (mixing counting and non-counting)
>> + more intuitive for common reachability use cases than option 3
>
> 6.A: /, |, ! as there are in 2LC.
> 6.B: *, +, ? are non-counting
> 6.C: No DISTINCT
> 6.D: No {} forms: {n}, {n,m}, {n,}, {,m}
>
> Option 6 also removes the {} forms.
>
> + Leaves the syntax open for the future
> e.g. {*}, {?length}, {?length>5}
> + {n,} is currently defined depending on *
> + {n,m} for large m-n, has the similar computability issues (WM-1)
Didn't someone (either in the WG, or a commentator) have a use case for {1,3} or similar?
I don't have a feel for how important it is, and I'm sure many would implement it as an extension.
- Steve
--
Steve Harris, CTO
Garlik, a part of Experian
1-3 Halford Road, Richmond, TW10 6AW, UK
+44 20 8439 8203 http://www.garlik.com/
Registered in England and Wales 653331 VAT # 887 1335 93
Registered office: Landmark House, Experian Way, Nottingham, Notts, NG80 1ZZ
Received on Tuesday, 3 April 2012 13:23:14 UTC