- From: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
- Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 09:23:12 +0000
- To: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- CC: public-rif-wg@w3.org
Sandro Hawke wrote:
> Talking after the call today, Axel made a good case for adopting the
> other solution to the infix-operators problem, namely to pay attention
> to whether there is a space between the "f" and the "(" in "f(x)". So
> "f (x)" is two terms, and "f(x)" is one term. This is my own
> preference, and what I implemented before the task force telecon (where
> I got talked out of it). One of Axel's considerations is alignment with
> SPARQL and other RDF-related languages, in user training materials. If
> we go with this kind of space-sensitivity, then we can have both the
> F-Logic and N3 styles available for expressing triples, so you can write
> your exampes in either one. And you can use commas if you want, but you
> can also leave them out. This means my parser should be able to handle
> all the existing examples and test cases... a pretty big win, really.
> The one thing people can't do is write "f (x)" when they mean "f(x)".
>
> -- Sandro
In that context, note that in the proposed PS we hav space-sensitivity
already anyways, for the '-' operator vs. dashes within IRIs. So, I
think that additional space-sensitivity would be totally acceptable.
Axel
--
Dr. Axel Polleres
Digital Enterprise Research Institute, National University of Ireland,
Galway
email: axel.polleres@deri.org url: http://www.polleres.net/
Received on Thursday, 12 March 2009 09:23:52 UTC