- From: Antoine Zimmermann <antoine.zimmermann@insa-lyon.fr>
- Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 18:41:33 +0200
- CC: RDF Working Group WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Le 30/03/2011 18:20, Yves Raimond a écrit : > On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 05:02:18PM +0100, Nathan wrote: >> RDF Working Group Issue Tracker wrote: >>> ISSUE-18: How do we parse "18." in Turtle? >> >> Is there a case where it's ambiguous? > > Apparently it is - all Turtle parsers have tried interpret it differently. However we end up fixing it, that definitely proves this part of the grammar needs to be more specific. I think Nathan is simply asking for an example where it is ambiguous. The fact that some parsers are not able to parse a Turtle document which follows the grammar is another problem. Nathan's examples are all following the grammar so they should be understood as correct Turtle documents by conformant parsers. As correct Turtle documents, they have only one possible interpretation. Now the question is: is there a case when a Turtle document conforms to the grammar and yet there are two interpretations of the underlying graph? If not, it just means that the syntax is difficult to parse, not that it is ambiguous. > > Best, > y > >> >> must be an integer (else not a valid turtle doc): >> <e:f> <b:f> 18. >> <e:f> <b:f> "e". >> >> must be an integer (else not a valid turtle doc): >> <e:f> <b:f> 18. >> >> must be an decimal (else not a valid turtle doc): >> <e:f> <b:f> 18., "e". >> >> must be an decimal (else not a valid turtle doc): >> <e:f> <b:f> 18.. >> <e:f> <b:f> "e". >> >> must be an decimal (else not a valid turtle doc): >> <e:f> <b:f> 18.. >> >> Which case is under question? >> > -- Antoine Zimmermann Researcher at: Laboratoire d'InfoRmatique en Image et Systèmes d'information Database Group 7 Avenue Jean Capelle 69621 Villeurbanne Cedex France Tel: +33(0)4 72 43 61 74 - Fax: +33(0)4 72 43 87 13 Lecturer at: Institut National des Sciences Appliquées de Lyon 20 Avenue Albert Einstein 69621 Villeurbanne Cedex France antoine.zimmermann@insa-lyon.fr http://zimmer.aprilfoolsreview.com/
Received on Wednesday, 30 March 2011 16:42:08 UTC