Re: Fwd: Re: Editorial clarification in Basic Graph Pattern intro

Thank you.  I am satisfied with this resolution.

David

On Mon, 2011-12-05 at 12:19 +0000, Andy Seaborne wrote:
> FYI: response sent to the list (forgot the cc again - every list is 
> different).
> 
>  Andy
> 
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: Editorial clarification in Basic Graph Pattern intro
> Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2011 12:17:42 +0000
> From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
> To: public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org
> 
> David,
> 
> Thank you for your suggestions - I have incorporated them into the the
> editors working draft.
> 
>  Andy
> 
> On 18/10/11 20:26, David Booth wrote:
> > Sec 5.1 says:
> > http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-query/#BasicGraphPatterns
> > [[
> > A sequence of triple patterns interrupted by a filter comprises a single
> > basic graph pattern.
> > ]]
> > The word "interrupted" is ambiguous, as it sometimes means
> > "terminated" (no continuation) and other times it means "paused" (with
> > continuation).  I suggest rewording the sentence as:
> > [[
> > A sequence of triple patterns, with optional filters, comprises a single
> > basic graph pattern.
> > ]]
> >
> > That section also says:
> > [[
> > Any graph pattern terminates a basic graph pattern.
> > ]]
> > *Any* graph pattern?  That doesn't seem to make sense, because a
> > sequence of triple patterns is a graph pattern.  Perhaps that sentence
> > was supposed to say "Any *other* graph pattern terminates a basic graph
> > pattern"?
> >
> >
> 
> 

-- 
David Booth, Ph.D.
http://dbooth.org/

Opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily
reflect those of his employer.

Received on Monday, 5 December 2011 14:56:58 UTC