Re: in...of syntax Re: Turtle Last Call: Request for Review

* Lee Feigenbaum <lee@thefigtrees.net> [2012-07-30 08:56-0400]
> On 7/30/2012 7:41 AM, Nathan wrote:
> >
> >>This WG has been trying to move Turtle and SPARQL closer together.
> >>
> >>One is a syntactic transformation (Turtle), the other is part of
> >>the mechanism for pattern matching, so they need explaining
> >>differently. SPARQL ^ is much more general.
> >>
> >>And hence,
> >>
> >>SPARQL Update does not support ^:p in INSERT DATA
> >>
> >>because it's not a matching operation.
> >
> >Yes, because Turtle is a syntax, and SPARQL is a query language
> >(as you well know), that deviation is already there, the two are
> >different specs for different purposes, however can and do share
> >some syntax. For example: Do we have TURTLE Update? or Turtle ?s,
> >or Turtle SELECT? or Turtle ASK? No because it's not a querying
> >language, and it doesn't require a matching operation.
> >
> 
> INSERT DATA is inserting data by specifying it with a syntax. It's
> not doing any querying.

I think the point remains that we have a pair of assertion language and query language which are nicely matched in that every assertion can be transplanted to the query language and match that assertion. If we add ^:p, it seems that remains true, though it does add some pressure to add that syntax to the CONSTRUCT and update parts of the query language.

I'm sort ambivalent about doing this now vs, putting it off for later. Doing it now would be less work overall (we don't need to invent a version number or have people serializing ^:p's cross their fingers hoping consumers' parsers are up to snuff. OTOH, it would be nice to get this out before starting another engineering cycle. I guess a +.5 for doing this now. Corresponding -.5 for doing it later, and -.2 for not doing it at all.


> Lee
> 
> >Best,
> >
> >Nathan
> >
> >
> 
> 

-- 
-ericP

Received on Monday, 30 July 2012 13:21:27 UTC