W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > April 2011

Re: ISSUE-19: Should TURTLE allow triples like "[ :p 123 ]." as SPARQL does ?

From: Peter Frederick Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2011 11:22:08 -0400
Message-ID: <20110401.112208.1973067596377415658.pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
To: <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
CC: <richard@cyganiak.de>, <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>, <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>
From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
Subject: Re: ISSUE-19: Should TURTLE allow triples like "[ :p 123 ]." as SPARQL does ?
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2011 10:08:14 -0500

> http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-query/#grammar
> 
> [21] TriplesBlock ::=
>     	TriplesSameSubject ( '.' TriplesBlock? )?
> [32] TriplesSameSubject ::=
>     	VarOrTerm PropertyListNotEmpty | TriplesNode PropertyList
> [34] PropertyList ::=
>     	PropertyListNotEmpty?
> [38] TriplesNode ::=
>     	Collection | BlankNodePropertyList
> [39] BlankNodePropertyList ::=
>     	'[' PropertyListNotEmpty ']'
> 
> A lot of this is to exclude "[] ."
> 
> http://www.sparql.org/query-validator.html ==>
> 
> http://www.sparql.org/query-validator?query=PREFIX+%3A+%3Chttp%3A%2F%2Fexample%2F%3E%0D%0A%0D%0ASELECT+%3Fbook+%3Ftitle%0D%0AWHERE%0D%0A+++{+[+%3Ap+123+]+}%0D%0A&languageSyntax=SPARQL&outputFormat=sparql&linenumbers=true
> 
> 	Andy


Ah, now I see it.  Tricky.

The extra complexity and lack of uniformity is a strong point against
this syntax.

peter


PS:  Why, oh why, is there also 
...
[21] HavingCondition	  ::=  	Constraint
...
[52] TriplesBlock ::= TriplesSameSubjectPath ( '.' TriplesBlock? )?
Received on Friday, 1 April 2011 15:23:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:25:41 GMT