- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 11:01:34 -0600
- To: marcos rebelo <oleber@gmail.com>
- Cc: timbl@w3.org, sandro@w3.org, public-cwm-talk@w3.org
On Tue, 2006-02-21 at 09:15 +0000, marcos rebelo wrote: > After +- implemented Sparql I'm now moving to n3, but I'm havig > problems finding references. > > I have found 2 references: > http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Notation3.html > http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/doc/ > > but this documents are old. > > The latest is from 2004, this means that is +- stable or in diferent > locations (where)? actually*, Notation3.html was edited Feb 1 15:52:25 2006 UTC. I see the CVS keywords got broken or something. The swap/doc stuff is also fairly current, though it lags here and there. I hope to integrate it more closely with the test suite so that it becomes somewhat self-maintaining. Perhaps the best specification of N3 is the cwm test suite. In the latest release announcement Cwm Release 1.1.0rc1 11 Aug 2005 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-cwm-announce/2005JulSep/0000.html You'll find pointers to not only the release tarball... http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/cwm-1.1.0rc1.tar.gz and the project homepage, with details about how to grab the latest source from CVS... http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/doc/cwm but also a log of log of the building of this release, which includes an enumeration of lots of test cases that were known to work as of that release: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2005Aug/att-0004/1.1.0rc1.log The /DesignIssues/Notation3 page points to a number of formal grammars for the language; the main one is the so-called n3.n3 i.e. http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/grammar/n3.n3 with corresponding HTML version: http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/grammar/n3-report.html We have plans in progress to (a) check n3.n3 against the test suite (b) replace the hand-coded n3 parser in cwm with something mechanically derived from n3.n3 An RFE was filed 10 Jun 2004 RFE: formal N3 grammar http://www.w3.org/2002/02/mid/1086902566.21030.1479.camel@dirk;list=public-cwm-bugs The grammar stuff isn't the top thing on our weekly meeting agenda, but it's not totally starved for attention either.. http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/doc/plans#weekly We talked about it briefly last week. http://www.policyawareweb.org/2005/pf-dev/02-15-paw-minutes.html#item06 In particular, I brought up a blog item I wrote... bnf2turtle -- write a turtle version of an EBNF grammar http://dig.csail.mit.edu/breadcrumbs/node/85 and timbl and I talked about g:seq and g:alt vs cfg:mustBeOneSequence and the like. > Thanks for the help Likewise, thanks for your interest in SPARQL and N3. > Marcos Rebelo * Mucho gusto encontrarte. I speak a little spanish... just enough to know that when you write "Where is the most actual n3 spec?" I should read it as "Where is the most recent n3 spec?". ;-) "acutal" is a false-cognate. If you translate it from Spanish to English and back, you get "de verdad". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_cognate http://www.spanish.bz/false-cognates.htm -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Tuesday, 21 February 2006 17:02:19 UTC