- From: Andy Seaborne <andy@apache.org>
- Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2013 10:08:47 +0000
- To: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
New TriG negative syntax tests added to cover this Andy On 20/11/13 22:07, Andy Seaborne wrote: > For those not able to make the telecon today: > > This response will form the WG response to CR-8/ISSUE-173 unless anyone > in the WG has any comments within the next 20 hours: > > Andy > > > > http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/CR_Comments > > https://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/173 > > > Proposed response: >> >> ------------------------------------------- >> >> Richard, >> >> Thank you for your comment regarding collections in Turtle and TriG. The >> Working Group agrees that it is desirable that Turtle and TriG be >> aligned here and the Working Group wishes to avoid: >> >> () . >> >> being a legal document. >> >> There is a bug in the TriG grammar and the following change has been >> made to rule 4g of TriG: >> >> >> [4g] triples2 ::= >> (blankNodePropertyList | collection) predicateObjectList? '.' >> >> ==> >> >> [4g] triples2 ::= >> blankNodePropertyList predicateObjectList? '.' >> | >> collection predicateObjectList '.' >> >> >> A collection must be followed by a predicate-object-list as in Turtle. >> >> This removes ( 1 2 3 ) . as a legal TriG document. It also removes () . >> as a legal document. The 'collection' in TriG and Turtle rule allows >> the empty collection () which is no triples. >> >> To go further and to keep alignment, requires significant changes to >> Turtle which the working group does not have the time to execute on even >> if there were general agreement it is desirable change to the language. >> >> If this addresses your comment, please reply with the subject prefixed >> by "[RESOLVED]". >> >> Andy >> on behalf of the RDF Working Group >> (also involved in the development of the SPARQL Grammar) >
Received on Friday, 22 November 2013 10:09:20 UTC