- From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
- Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 11:03:48 +0100
- To: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
- Cc: rdf-wg <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Andy, Thanks for the summary. On 20 Apr 2011, at 09:38, Andy Seaborne wrote: > 1/ bNode property lists. > > [ :p 1 ; :q 2 ] > > is valid SPARQL, including SPARQL 1.0 > > > 2/ A less frequent case is a free-standing lists and subject lists. > > (1 2 3 4) . > > SELECT * { (1 ?x 3 4) . } > > SELECT * { (1 2) rdfs:comment "List" } > > > 3/ Trailing dots > > A final DOT is not required in SPARQL: > > INSERT DATA { :s :p :o } > > > 4/ Strings > > Using ' and ''' for string quoting is legal in SPARQL. > Because SPARQL queries can be embedded in programs, allowing a character that does not require programming language quoting is useful. > > > 5/ Local part of prefix names can begin with a number. > > This was a change made to SPARQL during the per-LC development phase due to user feedback. Groups found that it was inconvenient in situations where all numeric identifiers from non-RDF data arose naturally > > e.g. > > employee:00154337 In all of these, with the possible exception of #3, Turtle should follow the SPARQL 1.0 decision, IMO. For any of those, even if the Turtle TF should decide to deviate from SPARQL 1.0, I don't think any case can be made for SPARQL 1.1 having to change. So personally I see the trailing decimal point issue as the only Turtle syntax question that affects SPARQL last call. Best, Richard
Received on Wednesday, 20 April 2011 10:04:17 UTC