- 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