W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-esw@w3.org > January 2003

Re: Vocabulary for result sets

From: Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org>
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 21:12:21 +0000
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20030123204355.038b1890@127.0.0.1>
To: "Seaborne, Andy" <Andy_Seaborne@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Cc: "'public-esw@w3.org'" <public-esw@w3.org>

At 07:25 PM 1/23/03 +0000, Seaborne, Andy wrote:
>------------------------------------------------------------
>@prefix rdfs:   <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> .
>@prefix rdf:    <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#> .
>@prefix dc:     <http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/> .
>@prefix q:      <http://somewhere/2003/01/result-set-vocab#> .
>@prefix xsd:    <http://www.w3.org/2000/10/XMLSchema#> .
>
>
><>  q:size "2"^^xsd:integer ;                           # Some information
>for convenience
>     q:hasVariable "x" ; q:hasVariable "y" ;     # Some information for
>convenience
>     q:hasSolution
>         [ q:hasBinding [ q:variable "x" ; q:value "123"^^xsd:integer ] ;
>           q:hasBinding [ q:variable "y" ; q:value
><http://example.com/resource1> ]
>         ] ;
>
>     q:hasSolution
>         [ q:hasBinding [ q:variable "x" ; q:value "2003-01-21" ] ;
>           q:hasBinding [ q:variable "y" ; q:value
><http://example.com/resource2> ]
>         ] ;
>     .
>------------------------------------------------------------
>
>(1) I used multiple occurrences of a property/value, rather than use a bag,
>for the solutions (rows) in a result set (table) and for the bindings in a
>solution
>
>(2) I used a struct-like encoding , rather DAML lists / RDF collections, or
>a bag, for the bindings.  What is good style for this sort of thing?

If I understand the intent correctly, I think this modelling works fine.

When I was playing with modelling access control, the modelling problems I 
ran in to with the style use use here were when the truth of the RDF 
assertion was dependent on one or more of the assertions being present.  I 
think you can remove any of your assertions and the rersult-set assertion 
statement remains true.

Hmmm... I wonder of there should be links to, or identifiers of, the 
knowledge-base and query used, so that valid results from different queries 
can be differentiated.  In practice, I think this kind of testing is a 
relatively closed-world activity, so maybe it doesn't matter.

#g


-------------------
Graham Klyne
<GK@NineByNine.org>
Received on Friday, 24 January 2003 09:36:40 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:11:12 GMT