Re: CASE

On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 7:12 PM, Lee Feigenbaum <lee@thefigtrees.net> wrote:
> A comment today on the -comments list asked for a CASE function, as a terser
> way to write what would otherwise be multiple nested IFs.
>
> I'm inclined (here and with the rest of the function library discussion) to
> begin declining new functions to keep the scope of our work manageable.
> After all, we are in theory only a month away from Last Call.
>
> Is anyone in the group inclined to add a CASE function to SPARQL 1.1?

I would like a CASE function, and it would be trivial to implement.
However, I think that your concerns about the timeframe are more
relevant here.

We put out the first public docs a year ago. If it was that important,
someone would have mentioned it before now. So I vote against it.

(Given the trivial nature of the implementation and implications, I
won't be upset if we include it, but we need to draw a line
somewhere).

Regards,
Paul Gearon

Received on Thursday, 18 November 2010 13:38:30 UTC