Re: string escapes reverted on purpose?

Concatenation is certainly convenient though we need to be careful 
regarding  the scope of an alias.
I suppose you are thinking more in the context of  ease of editing / 
building n3 files and not having to
worry about where the aliases occur.

Still I am just trying to  to be clear on the semantics even in one file. 
For example:

1) Do aliases inside formulas apply just to the formula ?  What are the 
scoping rules
for nested formulas.

2) Do aliases apply just from where they are encountered forward or to th 
entire file (or formula)?

Perhaps this is already spelled out somewhere and I have missed it? 

Stan.






Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Sent by: public-cwm-bugs-request@w3.org
06/23/2005 10:03 AM

 
        To:     Stan Devitt/AWKCT/CAN/AGFA/CA/BAYER@AGFA
        cc:     EspeonEefi <eefi@MIT.EDU>, "Eric Prud'hommeaux" <eric@w3.org>, 
public-cwm-bugs@w3.org, public-cwm-bugs-request@w3.org, Yosi Scharf 
<syosi@MIT.EDU>
        Subject:        Re: string escapes reverted on purpose?



On Tue, 2005-06-21 at 15:43 -0400, Stan Devitt wrote:
> In this regard,  is the plan to introduce the notion of a prolog into n3 

> as
> has been used in the SPARQL grammar ?  That would certainly help clarify 

> where and when aliases (for example) can be used.

I don't think we have much of a plan. We go back and forth
between wanting N3 to be closed under concatenation and
wanting the simplicity of "all the prefix decls and
keyword decls have to go at the top".


-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E

Received on Thursday, 23 June 2005 15:10:50 UTC