W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > November 2013

Re: Bare collections in Turtle and TriG

From: Andy Seaborne <andy@apache.org>
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2013 10:08:47 +0000
Message-ID: <528F2D2F.10006@apache.org>
To: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
New TriG negative syntax tests added to cover this

	Andy

On 20/11/13 22:07, Andy Seaborne wrote:
> For those not able to make the telecon today:
>
> This response will form the WG response to CR-8/ISSUE-173 unless anyone
> in the WG has any comments within the next 20 hours:
>
>      Andy
>
>
>
> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/CR_Comments
>
> https://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/173
>
>  > Proposed response:
>>
>> -------------------------------------------
>>
>> Richard,
>>
>> Thank you for your comment regarding collections in Turtle and TriG. The
>> Working Group agrees that it is desirable that Turtle and TriG be
>> aligned here and the Working Group wishes to avoid:
>>
>> () .
>>
>> being a legal document.
>>
>> There is a bug in the TriG grammar and the following change has been
>> made to rule 4g of TriG:
>>
>>
>> [4g]     triples2     ::=
>>       (blankNodePropertyList | collection) predicateObjectList? '.'
>>
>> ==>
>>
>> [4g]     triples2     ::=
>>       blankNodePropertyList predicateObjectList? '.'
>>          |
>>          collection predicateObjectList '.'
>>
>>
>> A collection must be followed by a predicate-object-list as in Turtle.
>>
>> This removes ( 1 2 3 ) . as a legal TriG document.  It also removes () .
>>   as a legal document.  The 'collection' in TriG and Turtle rule allows
>> the empty collection () which is no triples.
>>
>> To go further and to keep alignment, requires significant changes to
>> Turtle which the working group does not have the time to execute on even
>> if there were general agreement it is desirable change to the language.
>>
>> If this addresses your comment, please reply with the subject prefixed
>> by "[RESOLVED]".
>>
>>      Andy
>>      on behalf of the RDF Working Group
>>      (also involved in the development of the SPARQL Grammar)
>
Received on Friday, 22 November 2013 10:09:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:02:17 UTC