Add processor state, term constructor, and triple constructors. Change reifiedTriple to reifingTriple. #62

gkellogg · 2024-08-11T00:48:15Z

... for annotationBlock, tripleTerm, and reifier.

Also, extract the annotationBlock production from the annotation production.

…annotationBlock`, `tripleTerm`, and `reifier`. * Extract the `annotationBlock` production from the `annotation` production.

TallTed

Mostly small stuff. One big question.

spec/index.html

Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <tthibodeau@openlinksw.com>

TallTed

Source lines 1764-1768 may still need work — I'm not sure what "set from" means, compared to "set to" and "taken from". This part of the doc may become clearer with walk-through examples, with real values — and may need that help for readers other than me, too.

gkellogg · 2024-08-13T16:39:18Z

Source lines 1764-1768 may still need work — I'm not sure what "set from" means, compared to "set to" and "taken from". This part of the doc may become clearer with walk-through examples, with real values — and may need that help for readers other than me, too.

I'd like to get some input from @afs before making more changes, as I believe the original style for processor events may be his invention. We have not previously given examples of how to parse documents, and I don't think it makes sense to do so now. My guess is that most parsers tend to do their own thing and not strictly follow these rules, but they're needed to express the intention for how to turn Turtle into the Abstract Syntax.

spec/index.html

TallTed · 2024-08-14T19:46:57Z

Rather than 17 (or more) suggestions, one comment:

reifing should be reifying, in all cases, matching the case of the existing occurence.

gkellogg · 2024-08-14T19:56:02Z

Rather than 17 (or more) suggestions, one comment:

reifing should be reifying, in all cases, matching the case of the existing occurence.

Fixed! Brain fart in search/replace.

spec/index.html

hartig · 2024-08-15T17:43:21Z

I am skeptical about the change of reifiedTriple to reifyingTriple.

I understand that expressions accepted by this production are meant to be parsed into a reifying triple (using the term "reifying triple" here as per the current definition in PR w3c/rdf-concepts#98). But conceptually, at least for me, such an expression is something else than a reifying triple, and calling such an expression a "reifying triple" may be a source for confusion.

For instance, the expression

<< ex:bob  foaf:knows  ex:alice >>

matches the production. If we were to refer to this expression as a "reifying triple", I guess many users would assume that the triple (ex:bob, foaf:knows, ex:alice) is the one that we refer to as being "reifying", but it is not. Instead, the reifying triple is the one that this expression expands to; namely:

_:b rdf:reifies <<( ex:bob  foaf:knows  ex:alice )>> .

As a separate but related comment, I think that replacing the term "reified triple" by "reifying triple" as currently done in this PR -- namely, in the first two sentences of Section 2.10 -- is wrong. I created two separate review comments for these two sentences (comment 1 and comment 2).

gkellogg · 2024-08-15T21:38:35Z

As a separate but related comment, I think that replacing the term "reified triple" by "reifying triple" as currently done in this PR -- namely, in the first two sentences of Section 2.10 -- is wrong. I created two separate review comments for these two sentences (comment 1 and comment 2).

I disagree, but I'm open to alternatives. We need the concept reifying triple, and the reifyingTriple production does result in the spelled out form, so seems appropriate to me.

TallTed · 2024-08-16T19:24:46Z

I am taking this thread out of the context of any single suggestion, because it will get lost there (as have previous conversations).

We need the concepts of both a Reifying Triple and a Reified Triple.

These are distinct.

We have been talking about both for quite some time, and still we have gone back-and-forth with identifying the same thing as being an instance of one of these concepts and then the other.

A Reifying Triple is a triple that has a predicate of rdf:reifies.

A Reified Triple is the object of a triple that has a predicate of rdf:reifies.

<< ex:bob foaf:knows ex:alice >> might be read has having left out the optional ~ :reifier (and what seems to me to be an optional but necessarily implied .) following ex:alice, making this the complete expression:

<< ex:bob foaf:knows ex:alice ~ [] . >>

That's sugar for the actual reifying triple, which is

[] rdf:reifies <<( ex:bob foaf:knows ex:alice . )>> .

That reifies the now-reified triple,

ex:bob foaf:knows ex:alice .

I hope that's all clear....

gkellogg · 2024-08-16T20:59:54Z

A Reified Triple is the object of a triple that has a predicate of rdf:reifies.

We call that a Triple Term.

<< ex:bob foaf:knows ex:alice >> might be read has having left out the optional ~ :reifier (and what seems to me to be an optional but necessarily implied .) following ex:alice, making this the complete expression:
<< ex:bob foaf:knows ex:alice ~ [] . >>

The following are equivalent:

<< ex:bob foaf:knows ex:lice >>
<< ex:bob foaf:knows ex:lice ~ >>
<< ex:bob foaf:knows ex:lice ~ [] >>

They are all the same as [] rdf:reifies <<( ex:bob foaf:knows ex:lice )>> .

Note that the reifiedTriple (or whatever we finally settle on) production does not include the . in the grammar.

…r describes how the production relates to the `reifying triple` definition in RDF Concepts.

domel

Now looks good.

hartig

Just a few minor things.

spec/index.html

Co-authored-by: Olaf Hartig <olaf.hartig@liu.se>

TallTed · 2024-08-19T15:58:42Z

A Reified Triple is the object of a triple that has a predicate of rdf:reifies.

We call that a Triple Term.

In other words, "we call the object of a triple that has a predicate of rdf:reifies a Triple Term" instead of calling it the rather more intuitive "Reified Triple".

At the risk of howls of "bike-shedding", that says to me that rdf:reifies and reifiedTriple should be revisited, in favor of either a different verb or something that's not a verb at all.

spec/index.html

afs · 2024-08-24T16:56:40Z

spec/index.html

      Finishing the <a href="#grammar-production-annotation"><code>annotation</code></a> production
-      yields the RDF triple |TI| <code>rdf:reifies</code> |TT|
+      yields the RDF triple |curReifier| <code>rdf:reifies</code> |curTripleTerm|,


The rdf:reifies triple is generated in AnnotationBlock.

The "annotation" production is annotation ::= (reifier | annotationBlock)* so I don't think there is much to do here especially if the rdf:refies triple is generated at the start of an annotationBlock and all reifier needs to do is set curReifier which gets carried to the next block only (or the reifiedTriple case).

As mentioned above, this is needed to emit the reifying triple if |curReifier| was not consumed in an Annotation Block. For example :s :p :o ~ :r.

OK - I will reread but I thought a reifing triple was created in both parts for ~:r {| :q :z |}. Maybe Annotation Block only handled the "no explicit reifier case".

And :s :p :o :~r1 ~:r2 .

spec/turtle.bnf

…lock section.

…tion.

Co-authored-by: Andy Seaborne <andy@apache.org>

spec/index.html

afs · 2024-08-26T12:15:51Z

spec/index.html

@@ -1802,42 +1814,59 @@ <h3>RDF Triples Constructors</h3>
        |curPredicate| <var>N</var> .</span>
    </p>

-    <h4 id="tripleTerm" style="padding-bottom:0; margin-bottom:0;"><span>Triple Terms:</span></h4>
+    <h4 id="tripleTerm" style="padding-bottom:0; margin-bottom:0;"><span>Triple Terms</span></h4>

    <p>Beginning the <a href="#grammar-production-tripleTerm"><code>tripleTerm</code></a> production
      records the |curSubject| and |curPredicate|.


Small errata to RDF 1.1:

It does not say that curSubject and curPredicate are stacks, or alternative the parser state is a stack.

It says in 7.3 "The curSubject is bound to the subject production." True but it is more than just subject even in RDF 1.1 (subject position, blankNodePropertyList, property lists in the object position and collections). RDF 1.2 adds the tripleTerm, reifiedTriple, annotation and annotationBlock cases.

Neither curSubject nor curPredicate (nor the parser state in general) is a stack, they are global state. Triple constructors save and restore their values, so the "stack" is implemented via the activation records of these constructors, such as the Triple Term constructor.

afs · 2024-08-26T12:20:54Z

spec/index.html

+      Finishing the <a href="#grammar-production-reifier"><code>reifier</code></a> production,
+      |curReifier| is taken from the <a href="#handle-reifier"><code>reifier</code></a> term constructor.</p>


Delete this text. Moved to earlier.

The reason it is written the way it is is that Reifier can set the value that might be used in Annotation Block, but we'll only know that if there is an Annotation Block after the Reifier. If it was set, but not used, and we see another Reifier, it can then be emitted for the saved curReifier.

afs · 2024-08-26T12:26:31Z

spec/index.html

+    <h4 id="reifier" style="padding-bottom:0; margin-bottom:0;"><span>Reifier</span></h4>
+
+    <p>Beginning the <a href="#grammar-production-reifier"><code>reifier</code></a> production,
+      if |curReifier| is set, the production yields the RDF triple |curReifier| <code>rdf:reifies</code> |curTripleTerm|.


if |curReifier| is set,

It is not set until the end of the production so it is that previous sate at this point.

The production will set curReifier - there 's no "if". Do this now and not at the end, then yield the reifies triple using curReifier.

Suggested change

if |curReifier| is set, the production yields the RDF triple |curReifier| <code>rdf:reifies</code> |curTripleTerm|.

|curReifier| is taken from the <a href="#handle-reifier"><code>reifier</code></a> term constructor.

For the |tripleTerm| from the last RDF triple yielded then yield the the RDF triple |curReifier| <code>rdf:reifies</code> |curTripleTerm|.

There is no need to have a stack for curReifier. Even in annotations, only the last value is needed.

The text is intended to capture the events generated by :s :p :o ~:r1 ~:r2. When seeing ~:r1 there is no previously established curReifier so nothing is emitted, then curReifier is set from the reifier term constructor. The next time when it sees ~:r2, curReifier would be :r1 so :ri rdf:reifies <<(...)>> is emitted and then curReifier is set to :r2.

There is no stack for curReifier, there is just if it was previously set or not (Note that there is no text that says to save the value of curReifier anywhere). It is cleared when entering Annotations, set in either ReifierorAnnotation Block, and consumed in Reifier, Annotation BlockorAnnotations`.

I'm beginning to see what you want to do here but then some text does seem right.

Finishing the annotation production yields the RDF triple curReifier rdf:reifies curTripleTerm, resets the value of curReifier

needs a condition that curReifier is set. In :s :p :o ~:r {| :x :y |} it is not (it's been used). That's where I see identical triples being emitted once for the annotationBlock and one at the and of annotations.

There needs to be more recording and restoring:

:s :p :o ~:r1 {| :x1 :y2 ~:r2 {| :xx1 :yy2 |} ; :x2 :y2 |}.

which I think is:

:s :p :o . :r1 rdf:reifies <<( :s :p :o )>> . :r1 :x1 :y2 . :r2 rdf:reifies <<( :r1 :x1 :y2 )>> . :r2 :xx1 :yy2 . :r1 :x2 :y2 .

note :r1 :x2 :y2.

That's what my parser produces.

afs · 2024-08-26T12:30:05Z

spec/index.html


-    <h4 id="reifier" style="padding-bottom:0; margin-bottom:0;"><span>Reifiers:</span></h4>
+    <h4 id="reifiedTriple" style="padding-bottom:0; margin-bottom:0;"><span>Reified Triple</span></h4>

    <p>Beginning the <a href="#grammar-production-reifiedTriple"><code>reifiedTriple</code></a> production
      records the |curSubject| and |curPredicate|.


In the parser state section, maybe explain "record" means a stack.

afs · 2024-08-26T12:33:26Z

spec/index.html

+      <a href="#grammar-production-reifier"><code>reifier</code></a> of the
+      <a href="#handle-reifiedTriple"><code>reifiedTriple</code></a> term constructor
+      if present,
+      or a fresh RDF blank node, if not matched.
      A new <a href="#grammar-production-tripleTerm"><code>tripleTerm</code></a> instance |TT|
      is composed from
      the <a href="#grammar-production-subject"><code>subject</code></a>,


It may not be the subject production. It can be reifiedTriple. They both set curSubject but that is used used later as the reifier carried over.

afs · 2024-08-26T12:37:40Z

spec/index.html

      A new <a href="#grammar-production-tripleTerm"><code>tripleTerm</code></a> instance |TT|
      is composed from
      the <a href="#grammar-production-subject"><code>subject</code></a>,
      <a href="#grammar-production-predicate"><code>predicate</code></a>, and
      <a href="#grammar-production-object"><code>object</code></a> productions.
-      Finishing the <a href="#grammar-production-reifier"><code>reifier</code></a> production
+      Finishing the <a href="#grammar-production-reifiedTriple"><code>reifiedTriple</code></a> production
      yields the RDF triple |curSubject| <code>rdf:reifies</code> |TT|


curSubject may have been modified by the subject/reifiedTriple in the subject position inside << >>.
It might be batter use curReifier and make it a stack (for annotation and asserted triples it does not need to be a stack as in comment above.

spec/index.html

Co-authored-by: Andy Seaborne <andy@apache.org>

* Try to make all variables highlight across sections.Triple Contructor, don't emit the reifying triple unless |curReifier| is set.

gkellogg · 2024-08-26T19:13:16Z

spec/index.html

@@ -1802,42 +1814,59 @@ <h3>RDF Triples Constructors</h3>
        |curPredicate| <var>N</var> .</span>
    </p>

-    <h4 id="tripleTerm" style="padding-bottom:0; margin-bottom:0;"><span>Triple Terms:</span></h4>
+    <h4 id="tripleTerm" style="padding-bottom:0; margin-bottom:0;"><span>Triple Terms</span></h4>


I now think that this handler is not needed and can be eliminated.

…lues of these variables.

gkellogg · 2024-08-26T19:45:57Z

@afs, I re-worked the Triple Constructors partly based on your feedback, but it's possible I missed some of your points.

Removed the "Triple Terms" section, which didn't seem to be needed.
The Reifier handler now always emits a reifying triple and sets curReifier.
The Annotation Block handler sets curReifier if not set, in which case it assigns a blank node and emits the reifying triple.
The Reified Triples handler sets curTripleTerm and produces the node based on curReifier.
The Annotations handler sets curTripleTerm and stacks curReifier similar to curSubject and curPredicate.

…ationBlock, as it is only used on entry to AnnotationBlock, so restoring has no use.

afs

The best way forwards is to merge this PR. There are significant updates so making those visible to early implementers will enable feedback.

pchampin · 2024-08-29T16:58:43Z

This was discussed during the rdf-star meeting on 2024-08-29:
https://www.w3.org/2024/08/29-rdf-star-minutes.html#t04

* Add processor state, term constructor, and triple constructor for `…

aea3484

…annotationBlock`, `tripleTerm`, and `reifier`. * Extract the `annotationBlock` production from the `annotation` production.

gkellogg added the spec:editorial Minor issue or proposed change in the specification (markup, typo, informative text) label Aug 11, 2024

gkellogg requested review from afs and domel August 11, 2024 00:48

Eight state variables, not seven.

102b6f7

TallTed suggested changes Aug 12, 2024

View reviewed changes

Apply suggestions from code review

506d7e4

Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <tthibodeau@openlinksw.com>

gkellogg requested a review from TallTed August 12, 2024 20:32

TallTed reviewed Aug 12, 2024

View reviewed changes

gkellogg commented Aug 13, 2024

View reviewed changes

spec/index.html Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

gkellogg mentioned this pull request Aug 14, 2024

Add an informative definition for "reifying triple". w3c/rdf-concepts#98

Merged

Use "reifingTriple" instead of "reifiedTriple".

1873565

gkellogg changed the title ~~Add processor state, term constructor, and triple constructors~~ Add processor state, term constructor, and triple constructors. Change reifiedTriple to reifingTriple. Aug 14, 2024

Update spec/index.html

d99af73

"reifingTriple" => "reifyingTriple".

4d7e208

hartig reviewed Aug 15, 2024

View reviewed changes

spec/index.html Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

hartig reviewed Aug 15, 2024

View reviewed changes

spec/index.html Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

gkellogg mentioned this pull request Aug 16, 2024

Update SPARQL grammar for reifier syntax w3c/sparql-query#150

Merged

Revert the reifyingTriple production to reifiedTriple. This bette…

c1e90dd

…r describes how the production relates to the `reifying triple` definition in RDF Concepts.

gkellogg requested review from hartig and TallTed August 17, 2024 19:44

domel approved these changes Aug 17, 2024

View reviewed changes

reifier is optional, not zero or more, in reifiedtriple.

07960c1

hartig approved these changes Aug 19, 2024

View reviewed changes

spec/index.html Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

spec/index.html Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

spec/index.html Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

Apply suggestions from code review

c14ab8d

Co-authored-by: Olaf Hartig <olaf.hartig@liu.se>

This was referenced Aug 19, 2024

Broken references in RDF 1.2 TriG w3c/rdf-trig#36

Closed

Broken references in RDF 1.2 Turtle #66

Closed

afs reviewed Aug 24, 2024

View reviewed changes

spec/turtle.bnf Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

spec/turtle.bnf Show resolved Hide resolved

gkellogg and others added 5 commits August 24, 2024 14:28

Remove trailing ":" from RDF Triples Constructors sub-sections.

06cf7ff

Switch Annotations and Annotation BLock Triples Constructors.

79eb5f6

Move emitting the reifing triple to the beginning of the Annotation B…

778d4c0

…lock section.

Use verb rather than predicate in the reifiedTriple EBNF produc…

9d6ada0

…tion.

Update spec/index.html

41b6da1

Co-authored-by: Andy Seaborne <andy@apache.org>

gkellogg requested a review from afs August 24, 2024 21:30

afs reviewed Aug 26, 2024

View reviewed changes

gkellogg and others added 4 commits August 26, 2024 09:15

Apply suggestions from code review

ca01a5f

Co-authored-by: Andy Seaborne <andy@apache.org>

* In the Annotations

91a72b2

* Try to make all variables highlight across sections.Triple Contructor, don't emit the reifying triple unless |curReifier| is set.

Add other productions that bind to curSubject.

6300061

Improve naming consistency.

2d4b70a

gkellogg commented Aug 26, 2024

View reviewed changes

gkellogg added 2 commits August 26, 2024 12:29

Retool Triple Constructors based on feedback.

8e718f9

In Processor State explain that "records" creates a stack of saved va…

5d909e4

…lues of these variables.

gkellogg requested a review from afs August 26, 2024 19:36

Stack curReifier in Annotations.

3ad14fb

The value of curReifier does not need to be saved/restored in Annot…

15297c9

…ationBlock, as it is only used on entry to AnnotationBlock, so restoring has no use.

afs approved these changes Aug 28, 2024

View reviewed changes

gkellogg merged commit bc0650c into main Aug 29, 2024
2 checks passed

gkellogg deleted the update-annotation-processor-instructions branch August 29, 2024 19:32

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Add processor state, term constructor, and triple constructors. Change reifiedTriple to reifingTriple. #62

Add processor state, term constructor, and triple constructors. Change reifiedTriple to reifingTriple. #62

gkellogg commented Aug 11, 2024 •

edited by pr-preview bot

Loading

TallTed left a comment

TallTed left a comment

gkellogg commented Aug 13, 2024

TallTed commented Aug 14, 2024 •

edited

Loading

gkellogg commented Aug 14, 2024

hartig commented Aug 15, 2024

gkellogg commented Aug 15, 2024

TallTed commented Aug 16, 2024

gkellogg commented Aug 16, 2024

domel left a comment

hartig left a comment

TallTed commented Aug 19, 2024

afs Aug 24, 2024

gkellogg Aug 24, 2024

afs Aug 24, 2024

afs Aug 26, 2024

gkellogg Aug 26, 2024

afs Aug 26, 2024

gkellogg Aug 26, 2024

afs Aug 26, 2024

gkellogg Aug 26, 2024

afs Aug 26, 2024

gkellogg Aug 28, 2024

afs Aug 26, 2024

afs Aug 26, 2024

afs Aug 26, 2024 •

edited

Loading

gkellogg Aug 26, 2024

gkellogg commented Aug 26, 2024

afs left a comment •

edited

Loading

pchampin commented Aug 29, 2024

		Finishing the <a href="#grammar-production-reifier"><code>reifier</code></a> production,
		\|curReifier\| is taken from the <a href="#handle-reifier"><code>reifier</code></a> term constructor.</p>

	if \|curReifier\| is set, the production yields the RDF triple \|curReifier\| <code>rdf:reifies</code> \|curTripleTerm\|.
	\|curReifier\| is taken from the <a href="#handle-reifier"><code>reifier</code></a> term constructor.
	For the \|tripleTerm\| from the last RDF triple yielded then yield the the RDF triple \|curReifier\| <code>rdf:reifies</code> \|curTripleTerm\|.

Add processor state, term constructor, and triple constructors. Change reifiedTriple to reifingTriple. #62

Add processor state, term constructor, and triple constructors. Change reifiedTriple to reifingTriple. #62

Conversation

gkellogg commented Aug 11, 2024 • edited by pr-preview bot Loading

TallTed left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

TallTed left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

gkellogg commented Aug 13, 2024

TallTed commented Aug 14, 2024 • edited Loading

gkellogg commented Aug 14, 2024

hartig commented Aug 15, 2024

gkellogg commented Aug 15, 2024

TallTed commented Aug 16, 2024

gkellogg commented Aug 16, 2024

domel left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

hartig left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

TallTed commented Aug 19, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

afs Aug 26, 2024 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

gkellogg commented Aug 26, 2024

afs left a comment • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

pchampin commented Aug 29, 2024

gkellogg commented Aug 11, 2024 •

edited by pr-preview bot

Loading

TallTed commented Aug 14, 2024 •

edited

Loading

afs Aug 26, 2024 •

edited

Loading

afs left a comment •

edited

Loading