Re: Annotation syntax [was: SPARQL* test suite]

Hi Andy,

> Once upon a time, {$...$} was a proposed N3 syntax for sets as literals.

Indeed, but it was ($ ... $) and it is implemented in both CWM and EYE
e.g.

$ cat slit.n3
@prefix log: <http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/log#>.
@prefix : <http://example.org/test#>.

{($ 3 1 4 1 5 :c $) log:equalTo ($ :c :c 1 3 4 5 $)} => {:test1 a :PASS}.

$ cwm slit.n3 --think --data 2> /dev/null
#Processed by Id
        #    using base file:///tmp/slit.n3
             @prefix : <http://example.org/test#> .

    :test1     a :PASS .

$ eye --nope slit.n3 --pass 2> /dev/null
#Processed by EYE v20.0825.2124 josd
#eye --nope slit.n3 --pass

@prefix log: <http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/log#>.
@prefix : <http://example.org/test#>.

:test1 a :PASS.

#2020-08-30T10:14:07.785Z in=1 out=1 ent=1 step=2 brake=2 inf=12745
sec=0.028 inf/sec=455179
#ENDS

Jos

-- https://josd.github.io/ <http://josd.github.io/>


On Sun, Aug 30, 2020 at 11:09 AM Andy Seaborne <andy@apache.org> wrote:

>
>
> On 29/08/2020 20:54, Gregg Kellogg wrote:
> > On Aug 29, 2020, at 12:35 PM, Andy Seaborne <andy@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>>> On 28 Aug 2020, at 03:06, Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
> wrote:
> >>>>
> >> ...
> >>
> >>>> I, for one, keep being unimpressed by the Turtle syntax, which ends
> up becoming quite redundant because depending on the interpretation a
> triple needs to be stated twice (once for the actual assertion and once for
> the reifications). We are for now using a syntax such as
> >>>>
> >>>> ex:subject ex:predicate ex:object [[
> >>>>      ex:created "2010-10-10"^^xsd:date ;
> >>>> ]]
> >>
> >> Yes, there is room for annotation syntax. Stardog has the annotation
> after the predicate, before the object (guess: to avoid a problem with
> TriG). What happens about object lists?
> >>
> >> ]] can occur in Turtle data.
> >
> > [[ can occur in Notation-3, which will eventually want compatibility
> with RDF*, too.
> >
> >> Given that {} is used for grouping in TriG and SPARQL:
> >>
> >> {%...%}
> >> {|...|}
> >> {!...!}
> >> {{...}}
> >
> > Same for {{ in N3., but I do like the other suggestions.
>
> Thanks for the reminder.
>
> Once upon a time, {$...$} was a proposed N3 syntax for sets as literals.
>
>      Andy
>
> >
> > Gregg
> >
> >> and some others
> >> and the [%...%] (%...%) forms
> >>
> >> The PLX rule in Turtle is not a problem.
> >>
> >>     Andy
> >>
> >>>>
> >>>> to state both at the same time, and this seems to work better. But in
> the absence of any formal starting point (such as a respec spec and a
> proper development process with regular meetings and bug tracker tickets) I
> guess many implementations will just go with the original syntax or diverge
> further. Maybe everyone here is waiting for Olaf to take more control
> again, but that's not really his job or responsibility and maybe it's time
> for the implementers to chose a chair, have a couple of meetings and
> establish productive processes?
> >>>>
> >>>> Holger
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>
>
>