- From: Steve Harris <S.W.Harris@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 18:04:08 +0000
- To: "'RDF Data Access Working Group'" <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On Tue, Feb 15, 2005 at 05:26:36PM +0000, Andy Seaborne wrote:
> >Quick predication: this reminds me of the popular C typo relating if to
> >blocks, ie. the difference between
> >
> > SELECT ?name ?email ?phone
> > WHERE (?x e:worksFor <e:companyX>)
> > OPTIONAL{(?x e:emailAddress ?email)
> > (?x e:phoneNumber ?phone)}
> >and
> > SELECT ?name ?email ?phone
> > WHERE (?x e:worksFor <e:companyX>)
> > OPTIONAL (?x e:emailAddress ?email)
> > (?x e:phoneNumber ?phone)
> >
> >I suspect it will catch people out the same way. Not a huge problem though.
> >
> >- Steve
> >
>
> Good point. There is an argument for always requiring {}
Well, except that makes the syntax anoyingly non-regular, I dont want to
have to do GRAPH ?g { (?s ?p ?o) } all the time either. Yes, I do want
both internal and external cake :)
> ARQ will print parsed queries as fully bracketted and indented.
>
> Eclipse plugin and Emacs mode for SPARQL needed!
+ a vim syntax file of course.
> PS <e:companyX> -- ???
Oops, still not used to ommiting the <>'s, it will come.
- Steve
Received on Tuesday, 15 February 2005 18:04:10 UTC