I implemented this in an experimental TriG parser a few years ago. I
just made comma work anywhere, allowing the term before the comma to be
repeated.
So if you want to say Alice, Bob, and Charlie all have friend Doug, you say:
:Alice, :Bob, :Charlie :hasFriend :Doug.
Another example of subject-comma:
:Alice, :Bob, :Charlie a foaf:Person.
I also allowed it in the predicate position:
:sandro foaf:firstName,vcard:firstName "Sandro"
and in the Graph position:
GRAPH :g1, :g2, :g3 { ... some triples }
That says that all three of those graphs contain those triples. When you
want to say that, it's incredibly painful without this syntax.
Note that you can use them together: <a>,<b> <c>,<d> <e>,<f>. is 8 triples.
I think this is a completely wonderful and elegant and useful syntax,
and I shopped it around a little, but was unable to get folks in the RDF
WG at the time (2013) interested. I resigned myself to it not being in
Turtle or TriG, and I'd just put it in the language I was going to
propose right after they went to Rec. Alas, that didn't happen. (It
would also have allowed { } expression to occur anywhere a blank node
can, as syntactic sugar for a blank node graph label, and make the
pointy brackets optional when they're not required for parsing. And
maybe some other things, like date literals.)
-- Sandro
On 03/26/2015 07:59 AM, Bijan Parsia wrote:
I don’t understand the example or the goal.
On 24 Mar 2015, at 16:48, Fabiano Luz <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> 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.
