Re: Draft response for comment N3-1

On 23 Feb 2010, at 11:37, Andy Seaborne wrote:
> On 23/02/2010 10:18 AM, Steve Harris wrote:
>> Just for my own edification. Is it correct that N3 already includes a
>> path syntax similar to the SPARQL property paths one, and plans to  
>> add
>> expressions, so will require a delimiter, or is it a first one to  
>> stick
>> their syntax flag in the ground situation?

[fullsome description of N3 and SPARQL path syntax removed]

Thanks Andy, that made it a lot clearer.

Limiting property paths to P position, and expressions to O seems like  
it would work, as long as PPs don't allow whitespace. Is this  
currently enforced?

A syntax for PPs, which required (a future) expression syntax to use  
delimiters seems a little anti-social.

>> It doesn't really alter my feelings on the subject, but the three way
>> syntax land grab between turtle, N3 and SPARQL is not ideal. I don't
>> really get the impression that there's any W3C policy in this area.
> Agreed - just the differences in prefixed names between CURIEs,  
> Turtle, TriG, N3 and SPARQL causes friction for developers.  DAWG  
> got noticeable feedback from communities who have identifier schemes  
> that naturally map to URIs with numeric final parts so DAWG allowed  
> leading digits in the local part. Agreeing a set of terminals to  
> buuld languages on would be a start.

Yes, exactly.

- Steve

Steve Harris, Garlik Limited
2 Sheen Road, Richmond, TW9 1AE, UK
+44 20 8973 2465
Registered in England and Wales 535 7233 VAT # 849 0517 11
Registered office: Thames House, Portsmouth Road, Esher, Surrey, KT10  

Received on Tuesday, 23 February 2010 12:35:49 UTC