- From: Gregory Williams <greg@evilfunhouse.com>
- Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 14:38:11 -0400
- To: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
- Cc: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On Mar 30, 2012, at 5:25 AM, Andy Seaborne wrote:
> == Option 6
>
> 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}
I like this. The design looks like it strikes a nice balance. It doesn't involve supporting multiple path semantics, it provides intuitive results to the use cases in F&R, and it leaves plenty of room for expansion of property path features in extensions or future SPARQL standards. I wonder if there might be some pushback on dropping the {n,m} form, but otherwise I think this is great. I'd support this over the alternatives we've been considering.
.greg
Received on Friday, 30 March 2012 18:38:48 UTC