- From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
- Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2015 11:59:53 +0000
- To: Fabiano Luz <fabianocomp@gmail.com>
- Cc: public-sparql-dev@w3.org
Received on Thursday, 26 March 2015 12:00:34 UTC
I don’t understand the example or the goal.
On 24 Mar 2015, at 16:48, Fabiano Luz <fabianocomp@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hello Folks,
> On the predicate lists we have omitted the subject, for example:
>
> ?x foaf:name ?name ;
> foaf:mbox ?mbox .
This is clear.
> I wonder if there is some kind of "subject lists" where we omitted the
> predicate, for example:
>
> foaf:Bob foaf:phone ?phone1; foaf:John ?phone2 .
Er.. not so much. Let me try reformatting:
foaf:Bob foaf:phone ?phone1;
foaf:John ?phone2.
Well, that syntax would be dreadful (as ambiguous) and not super readable (contrary to the first one). I guess you could add a pro-predicate.
foaf:Bob foaf:phone ?phone1;
foaf:John ^^^ ?phone2.
That could be general purpose so the first example was sugar for:
?x foaf:name ?name ;
^^^ foaf:mbox ?mbox .
I don’t see the value.
> PS: I do not want to repeat the predicate.
Why not? What’s the use case?
Cheers,
Bijan.
Received on Thursday, 26 March 2015 12:00:34 UTC