- From: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
- Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 14:09:28 -0500
- To: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
- Cc: public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org
Thank you. I am satisfied with this resolution. David On Wed, 2011-12-14 at 18:46 +0100, Axel Polleres wrote: > Dear David, > > This is in response to > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2011Sep/0004.html > > Though an interesting proposal, the WG has after discussion come to > the conclusion that the addition of an additional feature like that is > too late in the process of our group and thus beyond our current > charter. > > Please also note that such prefix handling is not foreseen in the > current Turtle proposal worked on by the RDF1.1 working group [1]. > > Anyways, like other features that weren't selected in this current > standardisation round of SPARQL1.1, if the feature experiences > adoptions in implemented systems, it might be subject to future > evolutions of the standard. The working group is capturing points as > input for any future chartering process. > > http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Future_Work_Items > > We would be grateful if you would acknowledge that your comment has > been answered by sending a reply to this mailing list. > > best regards, > Axel, on behalf of the SPARQL Working group > > 1. http://www.w3.org/2010/01/Turtle/#sec-grammar-grammar > > > ---- Original message --- > It would be helpful to allow a prefix to be defined in terms of a > previously defined prefix, so that one could write a query like this: > > PREFIX testingGraph: <http://example/non-intuitive-URI/g147x2> > PREFIX productionGraph: <http://example/non-intuitive-URI/g42m11> > PREFIX graphToUse: testingGraph: > > INSERT ... GRAPH graphToUse: { ... } > WHERE ... GRAPH graphToUse: { ... } > > This way, to change the query from test to production use, one only > needs to change one prefix definition, and it is still very mnemonic: > > PREFIX graphToUse: productionGraph: > > Without this ability, one would instead have to write something like the > following, which is far less mnemonic (because URIs are often not very > intuitive): > > PREFIX graphToUse: <http://example/non-intuitive-URI/g42m11> > > > This ability would also enable groups of related graph names to be > managed a little easier. For example, a query might use three input > graphs and produce one output graph: > > PREFIX testBase: <http://example/test-URI-base/> > PREFIX productionBase: <http://example/production-URI-base/> > PREFIX graphBase: testBase: > > > INSERT ... GRAPH graphBase:output { ... } > WHERE ... GRAPH graphBase:input1 { ... } > ... GRAPH graphBase:input2 { ... } > ... GRAPH graphBase:input3 { ... } > > > However, at present the grammar for PREFIX definitions does not permit a > prefix to be defined in terms of a previously defined prefix: > http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-query/#rPrefixDecl > > [6] PrefixDecl ::= 'PREFIX' PNAME_NS IRI_REF > > I suggest changing grammar rule 6 to: > > [6] PrefixDecl ::= 'PREFIX' PNAME_NS IRIref > > This would allow the prefix to be defined in terms of either an IRI_REF > or a PrefixedName, per rule 125: > > [125] IRIref ::= IRI_REF | PrefixedName > > > > If the working group decides not to include this ability in SPARQL 1.1 > (especially given how late this comment is arriving) then please put it > on a wish list for a future version. > > Thanks! > > -- 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 Wednesday, 14 December 2011 19:16:42 UTC