- From: Peter Frederick Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2011 10:47:45 -0400
- To: <richard@cyganiak.de>
- CC: <ivan@w3.org>, <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>, <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>
From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de> Subject: Re: ISSUE-19: Should TURTLE allow triples like "[ :p 123 ]." as SPARQL does ? Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2011 23:01:11 -0500 > 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. [ <c> <d> ] is indeed a single node, just like 5+7 is *one* integer, not three. I don't expect to be able to use 5+7 as the single argument of function that has arity two, or three. I similarly don't expect to be able to use the blank node resulting from [ <c> <d> ] in a place that expects a triple. >> Why should that work? > > Why shouldn't it? It works in N3 and SPARQL. I rest my case. [Note, no smiley here, particularly for N3.] As far as I can see neither http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-query/ nor http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-query/ allow this construction as a triple anyway. So I don't see how it works in SPARQL. >> If this change is made, then constructions should also be so promotable. > > What is a construction? Sorry, I meant to say "collection", i.e., a list. > Richard peter
Received on Friday, 1 April 2011 14:48:39 UTC