On Mon, 2004-11-08 at 14:26 +0000, Seaborne, Andy wrote: [...] > > The important thing for the SPARQL grammar is to communicate the > language - it is not there to be exactly as an implementation would want > for yacc. The implementer is going tohave to do some work to turn the > grammar in the document into yacc/javacc/antlr/hand coded parser/.... Grammars are useful for communicating with people that understand them; i.e. trained computer scientists/programmers. It seems to me that, ideally, the SPARQL grammar would be suitable for use in parser generator tools directly, without human intervention. It's not worth a lot of work to meet this ideal, but it is worth a little, it seems wrong to dismiss "this will make it easier to work with yacc" comments entirely just because we cannot reach the ideal completely. I can't tell what the actual request was in this case. Andy's mailer isn't providing References/In-Reply-To headers, which makes life hard. Nor is the relevant part of the message quoted. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Monday, 8 November 2004 16:31:02 UTC