W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > June 2012

Re: simplified patches against last night's grammar

From: Gavin Carothers <gavin@carothers.name>
Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2012 09:37:31 -0700
Message-ID: <CAPqY83z641OS1KiyXu9LpJvDbJ+YRpy_tYhpSg31tgJajqaHQA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Eric Prud'hommeaux" <eric@w3.org>
Cc: Gregg Kellogg <gregg@kellogg-assoc.com>, RDF-WG WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Now on list to elicit more feedback.

On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 7:20 AM, Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org> wrote:
> typo, perhaps:
> -[12]    object                ::= iri | blank | predicateObjectList | literal
> +[12]    object                ::= iri | blank | blankNodePropertyList | literal
>
> string misallignment:
> -[155s]  STRING_LITERAL1       ::= '"' ([^#x22#x5C#xA#xD] | ECHAR | UCHAR)* '"'
> -[156s]  STRING_LITERAL2       ::= "'" ([^#x27#x5C#xA#xD] | ECHAR | UCHAR)* "'"
> -[157s]  STRING_LITERAL_LONG1  ::= "'''" (("'" | "''")? [^'\] | ECHAR | UCHAR)* "'''"
> -[158s]  STRING_LITERAL_LONG2  ::= '"""' (('"' | '""')? [^"\] | ECHAR | UCHAR)* '"""'

Okay, now I'm just going crazy. That's the way there were BEFORE when
someone said they were reversed.

> +[155s]  STRING_LITERAL1       ::= "'" ([^#x27#x5C#xA#xD] | ECHAR | UCHAR)* "'"
> +[156s]  STRING_LITERAL2       ::= '"' ([^#x22#x5C#xA#xD] | ECHAR | UCHAR)* '"'
> +[157s]  STRING_LITERAL_LONG1  ::= "'''" (("'" | "''")? ([^'\] | ECHAR | UCHAR))* "'''"
> +[158s]  STRING_LITERAL_LONG2  ::= '"""' (('"' | '""')? ([^"\] | ECHAR | UCHAR))* '"""'

No, that can't be right. Those are aren't what is in there now. The
current grammar has [23] [24] numbered productions. Check
http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-turtle/turtle.bnf
before I go totally crazy (perhaps we shouldn't call them 1,2 and make
clearer what's going on here as you, me, Andy, and Greg Kellogg all
seem to have at one point or another confused this.

>
> two \s in IRIREF:
> -[138s]  IRIREF                ::= '<' ([^#x00-#x20<>\"{}|^`\] | UCHAR)* '>'
> +[138s]  IRIREF                ::= '<' ([^#x00-#x20<>"{}|^`\] | UCHAR)* '>' # no UCHAR in SPARQL

Changed!

>
> simplification and whitespace:
> -[24]    DECIMAL               ::= [+-]? ([0-9]* '.' [0-9]+)
> +[24]    DECIMAL               ::= [+-]? [0-9]* '.' [0-9]+
> -[168s]  PN_LOCAL              ::= (PN_CHARS_U | [0-9] | PLX) ((PN_CHARS | '.' | PLX)* PN_CHARS | PLX)?
> +[168s]  PN_LOCAL              ::= (PN_CHARS_U | [0-9] | PLX) ((PN_CHARS | '.' | PLX)* (PN_CHARS | PLX))?

These are hopeless and the result of the method being used in bnf2html
unless you have a VERY VERY strong opinion I'm going to leave these
alone as last time I tried to fix them I broke most of the other
nesting/precedence rules. They are correct but have slightly too many
()s

>
> the usual prefix/base thing:
> -[4]     prefixID              ::= '@prefix' PNAME_NS IRIREF
> +[4]     prefixID              ::= PREFIX PNAME_NS IRIREF
> -[5]     base                  ::= '@base' IRIREF
> +[5]     base                  ::= BASE IRIREF
> -[128s]  RDFLiteral            ::= String (LANGTAG | '^^' iri)?
> +[17]    RDFLiteral            ::= String (LanguageTag | '^^' iri)?
> +[18]    LanguageTag           ::= BASE | PREFIX | LANGTAG
> +[20]    BASE                  ::= '@base'
> +[21]    PREFIX                ::= '@prefix'

Ugh, I'm not sure this is any better. This clearly doesn't solve the
issue as this is what we had before and what Greg used to create the
RDF.rb turtle parser, which didn't work correctly :( Also the same as
what was used to create Raptor which again has the same issue. Need to
be clearer somehow on what should happen with "literal"@base and
"literal"@prefix.

>
> --
> -ericP
Received on Saturday, 16 June 2012 16:38:02 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:25:49 GMT