- From: Chris Bizer <chris@bizer.de>
- Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2004 11:44:57 +0200
- To: "Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: "Patrick Stickler" <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>, <www-archive@w3.org>, "Pat Hayes" <phayes@ihmc.us>
OK, braces in TriG. What do you guys think about braces in TriQL? SELECT ?a WHERE ?b (?a <km:Skill> <km:Programming> . ?a <rdf:type> <km:Person> ) (?b <swp:assertedBy> ?c . ?c <swp:authority> ?d ) (?d <km:affiliation> ?e) (?e <rdf:type> <km:Project> . ?e <km:Topic> <km:Programming> ) AND COUNT(?e) > 2 or SELECT ?a WHERE ?b {?a <km:Skill> <km:Programming> . ?a <rdf:type> <km:Person> } {?b <swp:assertedBy> ?c . ?c <swp:authority> ?d } {?d <km:affiliation> ?e} {?e <rdf:type> <km:Project> . ?e <km:Topic> <km:Programming> } AND COUNT(?e) > 2 I tend to stay with parentheses because it makes typing queries easier, RDQL also uses parentheses and a query lanuage is related more to the abstract syntax than to one concrete syntax. Also weak arguments :-) Any optinions? Jeremy, do you have a up-to-date version of our paper, which you could send me? Chris ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com> To: "Chris Bizer" <chris@bizer.de> Cc: "Patrick Stickler" <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>; <www-archive@w3.org>; "Pat Hayes" <phayes@ihmc.us> Sent: Friday, April 02, 2004 12:18 PM Subject: Re: parentheses vs. braces in TriQ > Chris Bizer wrote: > > > Hi Patrick, > > > > > >>>>Section 4: use of parentheses > >>>>Perhaps we should use crather than parentheses > >>>>to be more compatible with N3/Turtle, which use parentheses > >>>>for collections. > >>> > >>>I am easy - parentheses as opposed to braces was Chris's choice - I'll > >>>let him argue the case (if he wishes to). > >> > >>I'm thinking about what will create the least path of resistance > >>if folks start adopting this -- and compatability with N3/Turtle > >>seemed to me to be a big win. > >> > > > > > > Hmm, yes, I see arguments for both options: > > > > > > > > pro parentheses: > > > > - we started with them and already used them in the SWIG paper > > > > - a named graph is not a N3 formula, which is underlined by using > > parentheses > > > > - TriG is based more on N-Triples than N3. > > > > - We didn't decide on a list syntax for TriG yet, or whether we want to > > include lists at all. > > > > - using braces would also imply braces in TriQL which would move it further > > away from RDQL > > > > - parentheses look "nicer" and are easier to reach on German and English > > keyboards. > > > Much easier on italian keyboards which do not have braces. > > > > > > > > I think that all these arguments are not very strong. So if you have the > > strong feeling that we should change to braces it is OK with me. > > > > > > > > Chris > > > however, none of the arguments is strong > > Jeremy > > >
Received on Friday, 2 April 2004 05:44:24 UTC