Re: Reified triple syntax

On 27/09/2024 21:02, Gregg Kellogg wrote:
> Note that ‘|’ doesn’t currently conflict, but it could be a path of 
> expansion for N3 [1]. I mentioned this the other day, so I think it 
> would be wise to avoid this character.

‘|’   is used in SPARQL property paths. there can be several uses of 
path-alt one line.

Annotation syntax from the CG avoided using oen character "{" "}" for 
the annotation grouping to leave the future open for graph literal/terms/...

     Andy

>
> Gregg Kellogg
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> [1] https://w3c.github.io/N3/spec/#grammar-production-path
>
>> On Sep 27, 2024, at 12:43 PM, Thomas Lörtsch <tl@rat.io> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Niklas,
>>
>> thank you for the links! I agree that these are indeed large 
>> examples, and thank you for the effort. Still, and I know that I do 
>> sound like a measly know-all when I say this, they are still very few 
>> ;-) But it’s unreasonable to expect us to get much further with 
>> example data (and if we did, it would still not be sure that we could 
>> evaluate them properly). Syntax is in a lot of ways a matter of taste 
>> and intuition. IMO it’s important to try to stick to some principles 
>> and seemingly objective criteria, however without getting hung up on 
>> those too much ;-)
>>
>>> On 23. Sep 2024, at 17:00, Niklas Lindström <lindstream@gmail.com> 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Yes, I tried out syntax variants on the UCR examples, plus a larger
>>> example based on the full Wikidata description about Elizabet Taylor
>>> (complete with nominations, awards, spouses and nationalities (e.g.
>>> twice a US citizen)). For illustration, I just added a new gist with
>>> those updated to the new syntax:
>>>
>>> https://gist.github.com/niklasl/c0ba767efe4816a515ad04a4db48b3e6
>>
>> Very nice! I just converted them to my proposal from [7]:
>> Liz: https://gist.github.com/rat10/ddfd60afb42a8062fd7f1680ebedd022
>> UCR: https://gist.github.com/rat10/6c66e360c36b7d81bb3b9bc21fc16b96
>>
>> The good news is: this is relatively easy to do :)
>>
>> The bad news is: this reads not particularily well. In the current 
>> version (i.e. in yout gist linked above) annotation syntax seem 
>> visually better discernible from standard triples. The cost however, 
>> especially that it uses curly braces which should be reserved to 
>> graphs, is IMO too high. Seems to me like more thinking and tinkering 
>> is needed…
>>
>> However, the difference is more pronounced in the Elizabeth Taylor 
>> example which is also in the current syntax too involved to be really 
>> readable, especially because of those excrutiatingly long 
>> identifiers. Some line breaks would certainly help but I couldn’t 
>> figure out how to introduce them automatically in a sufficiently nice 
>> way (i.e. with proper indentation).
>>
>>> (One caveat is the last UCR example using a full list in a triple
>>> occurrence; also mentioned in [1].)
>>
>> Uff. I’ll comment on that in the issue itself.
>>
>>> (The now obsolete examples I linked to from the comments on either the
>>> original github issue [2] or the addressing PR [3] are at [4] and [5}.
>>> Of note in [2] is that pipe collided with SPARQL alternativePath in
>>> annotations; which this change fixed.)
>>
>> I just read through [3] again and noticed a comment by Andy saying 
>> that "If we go postfix, then '~' vs '|' is pure choice" [6]. If that 
>> is indeed correct (I guess it hasn’t been tested thoroughly as the 
>> discussion from that point on favored the tilde) then it’s good to 
>> know. Aesthetically I find the tilde quite okay. However, I also have 
>> that urge to unify the syntactic variations, as outlined in [7], and 
>> in that respect the pipe seems better.
>>
>> Best,
>> Thomas
>>
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Niklas
>>>
>>> [1]: 
>>> <https://github.com/w3c/rdf-turtle/issues/71#issuecomment-2363703036>
>>> [2]: <https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/116>
>>> [3]: <https://github.com/w3c/rdf-turtle/pull/51>
>>> [4]: <https://gist.github.com/niklasl/c23925f831950506fde4eb73885319cd>
>>> [5]: <https://gist.github.com/niklasl/1845c6bc8b37402cc9698720c2e22f88>
>> [6] https://github.com/w3c/rdf-turtle/pull/51#issuecomment-2256850306
>> [7] 
>> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-star-wg/2024Sep/0073.html
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Sep 20, 2024 at 12:37 PM Andy Seaborne <andy@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 20/09/2024 09:46, Thomas Lörtsch wrote:
>>>>> this is one of your typical "arguments": seems to look so wise, 
>>>>> but is so vacuous all the same. if you think you know something 
>>>>> that can only be seen in large examples, then show it or at least 
>>>>> describe it in some detail. don't expect everybody to just believe 
>>>>> in your wisdom
>>>>
>>>> There have been examples done by Niklas on the visual impact of syntax
>>>> designs.
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>