Re: 'FILTER' '(' Expression ')'

As per the telecon, this change has been made: I took the route of a chnage that 
affected the least number of approved tests (as per Eric's suggestion).

1 syntax test is changed.

I have searched through rq23 and changed the examples.

Grammar updated in rq23

I have updated other tests in the test collection that are affected (29) :

Bound/bound1.rq
Expr1/expr-1.rq
Expr1/expr-2.rq
Expr1/expr-3.rq
Expr2/query-bev-1.rq
Expr2/query-bev-3.rq
Expr2/query-bev-4.rq
Expr2/query-bev-5.rq
Expr2/query-bev-6.rq
ExprBuiltIns/q-datatype-1.rq
ExprBuiltIns/q-str-1.rq
ExprBuiltIns/q-str-2.rq
ExprBuiltIns/q-str-3.rq
ExprBuiltIns/q-str-4.rq
ExprEquals/query-eq-1.rq
ExprEquals/query-eq-2.rq
ExprEquals/query-eq-3.rq
ExprEquals/query-eq-4.rq
ExprEquals/query-eq-5.rq
ExprEquals/query-eq2-1.rq
ExprEquals/query-eq2-2.rq
examples/ex11.2.3.1_0.rq
examples/ex11.2.3.1_1.rq
examples/ex11.2.3.2_0.rq
examples/ex11.2.3.2_1.rq
examples/ex11.2.3.7_0.rq
examples/ex11_0.rq
examples/ex11_1.rq
examples/ex3.rq

I also fixed:
regex-query-001,2,3,4 as well as they didn't parse (missing rdf: PREFIX)

 Andy


Seaborne, Andy wrote:
> 
> 
> Eric Prud'hommeaux wrote:
> 
>>"{ ?p ?s ?o FILTER ?x = q:name () ?p ?o2 }" was ambiguous so AndyS,
>>DaveB, SteveH, and Jeen decided we'd put parens around the filter
>>expression.
> 
> 
> AndyS wasn't expressing an opinion one way or the other in the discussion.
> 
>  > AndyS proposed an exception for FILTER (REGEX(?a, ?b)) but
> 
>>the rest of us dragged our feet.
> 
> 
> Regular expressions seem to be a common feature that people use with RDQL/Jena. 
>   It is also a source of many questions as to the syntax.
> 
> The fully nested form
> 
> FILTER (REGEX(?a, "substring"))
> 
> is unnnecessarily bracketted.
> 
>  >
>  > example test:
>  >
>  > 
> http://www.w3.org/2005/01/yacker/uploads/sparqlTest?lang=perl&text=PREFIX+%3A++%3Chttp%3A%2F%2Fexample.org%2Fns%23%3E+%0D%0ASELECT+*%0D%0A%7B+OPTIONAL+%7B+%3Aa+%3Ab+%3Ac+%7D+.+%3Fx+%3Fy+%3Fz+FILTER+%28%3Fx+%3C+%3Fy%29+%7D%0D%0A&action=validate+text
>  >
> 
> I have tested requiring () on filters, except REGEXs, and it seems to work out OK.
> 
> As we accepted the syntax tests yesterday, and they would need to change, I have 
> not made any changes until it is clear I can or shouldn't.
> 
> There are 3 syntax tests to change and there are about 11 examples to change 
> from rq23.
> 
>  Andy
> 
> 
> PS
> 
> == Aside
> 
> Note that this does not avoid the other parser issue around this area:
> 
>   FILTER ?x = q:name ()
> 
> has to greedily accept the () because
> 
>   FILTER ?x = q:name
> 
> is also legal.
> 
> It's common - example - "?x" and "?x + 2"
> 
> This is because we use qnames for functions and for expression constants.  Using 
> "&" for function call / cast does not have this matter.  I am not proposing this 
> as a solution - just giving a complete account.
> 
>

Received on Wednesday, 15 June 2005 10:59:01 UTC