- From: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
- Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 07:55:03 +0100
- To: dawg mailing list <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On 10 Jun 2006, at 20:35, Seaborne, Andy wrote: >> Strictly speaking, commas may be unnecessary since SELECT ?a ?b + ?c >> can be parsed. > > Unbracketed expressions would need commas to know when they end and > a new one start. Given we are in CR, mandatory commas would be a > significant change. Is that a huge setback? I'm not sure of the process implications. Given that the commas-in-triple-patterns consistency problem is gone is seems a bit unfortunate to stick with a decision that results from that. > I hope I've shown that expressions in SELECT are possible. You have, but not that it's particularly pleasant syntax. - Steve
Received on Sunday, 11 June 2006 06:55:15 UTC