RE: [TF-PP] Possible starting points

Option 1 has the most support and least against it so I have put some starting material on the wiki:

http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Design:PropertyPaths


although everything is up for debate and change.  I've tried to pull the material from the other pages and we can continue use those pages for general commentary if needed.

Suggested next step: discussion, corrections and possibilities, leading to raising design issues against this or an alternative text.

 Andy


> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-rdf-dawg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-rdf-dawg-request@w3.org]
> On Behalf Of Seaborne, Andy
> Sent: 30 September 2009 14:01
> To: SPARQL Working Group
> Subject: RE: [TF-PP] Possible starting points
> 
> Snapshot of the strawpoll so far:
> 
>             Opt1    Opt2    Opt3    Opt4    Opt5    Opt6
> Andy:       +1      0       -1      -1      0       -1
> Luke:       +1      -1      0       -1      -1      -1
> Steve:      +1      -1      -1      -1      -1      -1
> Olivier:    +1      0       +1      +1      +1      -1
> Ivan:       +1      0       -1      -1      -1      -1
> Chimezie:   +1      -1      -1      .       .       .
> Alex:       +1      -1      +1      0       +1      -1
> Paul:       +1      +1      -1      -1      -1      -1
> Lee:        +1      -1      -1      -1      -1      -1
> 
> 
> Option 1: +1=>9 ; 0=>0 ; -1=>0
> 
> Option 2: +1=>1 ; 0=>3 ; -1=>5
> 
> Option 3: +1=>2  ; 0=>1 ; -1=>6
> 
> Option 4: +1=>1  ; 0=>1 ; -1 =>6
> 
> Option 5: +1=>2  ; 0=>1 ; -1=>5
> 
> Option 6: +1=>0  ; 0=>0 ; -1=>7
> 
> 
> Olivier suggested a variant of (2) with a joker syntax for "any"
> Ivan suggested a variant of (3) with just minLength and maxLength
> 
> (hopefully, I have transcribed the strawpolls responses correctly)
> 
>  Andy

Received on Wednesday, 7 October 2009 21:53:06 UTC