- From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
- Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2011 09:31:11 +0530
- To: Peter Frederick Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Cc: <ivan@w3.org>, <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>, <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>
On 31 Mar 2011, at 17:57, Peter Frederick Patel-Schneider wrote: > I don't see any inconsistency. You appear to want to move something > that is a node and put it in a place where a triple is expected? [ <c> <d> ] is not a node. It is three nodes. > Why should that work? Why shouldn't it? It works in N3 and SPARQL. > If this change is made, then constructions should also be so promotable. What is a construction? Richard > > peter > > > From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> > Subject: Re: ISSUE-19: Should TURTLE allow triples like "[ :p 123 ]." as SPARQL does ? > Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2011 07:22:01 -0500 > >> It does not fix technically. But there is an inconsistency in the language. It is >> perfectly fine to say >> >> <a> <b> [ <c> <d> ] . >> >> ie, having the [ ... ] syntax defining a blank node with some triples, if I take this >> out of the object position >> >> [ <c> <d> ] . >> >> then this is no longer valid. I must admit that was one of the most frequent error I >> made in my early Turtle days... >> >> Ivan >> >> >> >> On Thu, March 31, 2011 12:09 pm, Peter Frederick Patel-Schneider wrote: >>> From: RDF Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org> >>> Subject: ISSUE-19: Should TURTLE allow triples like "[ :p 123 ]." as SPARQL does ? >>> Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 10:33:10 -0500 >>> >>>> >>>> ISSUE-19: Should TURTLE allow triples like "[ :p 123 ]." as SPARQL does ? >>>> >>>> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/19 >>>> >>>> Raised by: >>>> On product: >>> >>> I do not feel that this change fixes anything in TURTLE, so >>> >>> -1 >>> >>> Peter F. Patel-Schneider >>> Bell Labs Research >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead >> URL: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ >> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf >
Received on Friday, 1 April 2011 04:01:54 UTC