- From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
- Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2012 19:08:03 +0000
- To: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
- CC: public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org
On 06/03/12 18:42, David Booth wrote: > Understood. I am taking your response to mean that the WG has not > decided that multi-line comments are a bad idea, but that the WG has > merely decided not to put them in the current (1.1) version of SPARQL. > If I am wrong please let me know. > > Would you please add this (or should I add it directly?) to the Future > Work Items list for consideration in the next version? > http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Future_Work_Items Added. I would be grateful if you would acknowledge that your comment has been answered by sending a reply to this mailing list so we can close of this thread. Andy > > Thanks, > David > > > On Tue, 2012-03-06 at 16:40 +0000, Andy Seaborne wrote: >> >> On 08/02/12 20:09, David Booth wrote: >>> Inspired by a post from Danny Ayres >>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/semantic-web/2012Feb/0031.html >>> and by my own need, it would be very helpful to have multi-line comments >>> in SPARQL (and Turtle too) >> >> David, >> >> Thank you for the comment on multiline comments. >> >> It is a stylistic point as to whether C-style multiline comments are a >> good or bad idea. Looking at their use in C shows that many times there >> is still a leading "*" to mark the line. >> >> The working group does not intend to add multiline comments to SPARQL at >> this time. >> >> We would be grateful if you would acknowledge that your comment has been >> answered by sending a reply to this mailing list. >> >> Andy >> On behalf of SPARQL-WG >> >> >
Received on Tuesday, 6 March 2012 19:08:29 UTC