- From: Seaborne, Andy <andy.seaborne@hp.com>
- Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 10:15:23 +0000
- To: Steve Harris <S.W.Harris@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Cc: 'RDF Data Access Working Group' <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Steve Harris wrote: > On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 04:30:49 +0000, Andy Seaborne wrote: > >>Steve Harris wrote: >> >>>On Sun, Mar 06, 2005 at 04:58:16 +0000, Andy Seaborne wrote: >>> >>> >>>>== 4 == Syntactic support for reification >>>> >>>>Some people use reification and use it a lot - some people use named >>>>graph-like approaches and avoid reification - most people just don't use >>>>either. >>> >>> >>>The others seem good, and I have no opinion on this... >> >>In progress. I have put this in and have a @@ToDo@@ to explain it in rq23. >> >>Also ?id << ?s ?p ?o >> >> >> ?id rdf:subject ?s >> ?id rdf:pedicate ?p >> ?id rdf:object ?o >> >>Also x:z << ?s ?p ?o >> >> >> x:z rdf:subject ?s >> x:z rdf:pedicate ?p >> x:z rdf:object ?o > > > I'd like to repeat my dislike for this syntax, << and >> have been used > for a lot of things in other languages, and this seems like an odd one - I > get the reference, guillemets are quotation marks*, and << looks a bit like > a guillemet, but it still seems ugly to me. > > If the group wants some sugar for reified triples then I'd prefer it if it > was more inkeeping with the rest of the SPARQL syntax, so something like > REIFIED ?x { ?s ?p ?o } or fn:reified(?x, ?s, ?p, ?o) or similar. > > - Steve > > * NB not all countries use outward guillemets, some use >> foo >> or > >> foo <<. > I considered various things - the reason I settled on using punctuation, not words, was because it is syntactic support for writing triples out in full, much like () and [] and it is not a graph pattern combining operator. Single character markers, like *, aren't very clear. ** is a bit heavy in some monospace fonts (as are %%) . @@ is something else in W3C-speak. # is a comment. etc etc. There are various choices of punctuation that would work - I did consider !! but that is shouting, not stating. N3 uses ! for paths. Andy
Received on Friday, 11 March 2005 10:15:38 UTC