W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org > February 2006

[closed]: SPARQL: BASE IRI resolution [test-todo]

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 09:58:38 -0600
To: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
Cc: Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org>, public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org
Message-Id: <1140451118.26363.415.camel@dirk.w3.org>

On Sun, 2006-01-29 at 02:35 +0100, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote:
> * Eric Prud'hommeaux wrote:
> >Relative IRIs are combined with base IRIs as per Uniform Resource
> >Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax [RFC3986] using only the basic
> >algorithm in Section 5.2 . Neither Syntax-Based Normalization nor
> >Scheme-Based Normalization (described in sections 6.2.2 and 6.2.3 of
> >RFC3986) is performed. Characters additionally allowed in IRI
> >references are treated in the same way that unreserved characters are
> >treated in URI references, per section 6.5 of Internationalized
> >Resource Identifiers (IRIs) [RFC3987].
> 
> s/combined with/resolved using/ or something like that. This is not
> really a "combination" process. But basically this is fine with me,
> thanks.

OK, marking this closed w.r.t. LC review, and adding [test-todo]
to queue the test details for CR.

> There do not seem to be
> 
> >On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 05:24:57AM +0200, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote:
> >> 
> >> * Dan Connolly wrote:
> >> >In what way is the same document reference not allowed? Is that
> >> >something special to SVG?  I don't see how it's relevant to SPARQL.
> >> 
> >> For a query at http://example.org/foo.rq my understanding is that
> >> there is no difference between
> >> 
> >>   BASE <http://example.org/bar.rdf>
> >>   SELECT ...
> >>   FROM <http://example.org/bar.rdf>
> >> 
> >> and
> >> 
> >>   BASE <http://example.org/bar.rdf>
> >>   SELECT ...
> >>   FROM <bar.rdf>
> >> 
> >> and
> >> 
> >>   BASE <http://example.org/bar.rdf>
> >>   SELECT ...
> >>   FROM <>
> >> 
> >> and
> >> 
> >>   SELECT ...
> >>   FROM <http://example.org/foo.rq>
> >> 
> >> and
> >> 
> >>   BASE <http://example.org/foo.rq>
> >>   SELECT ...
> >>   FROM <http://example.org/foo.rq>
> >> 
> >> All refer to the same RDF dataset in the FROM clause, since in each
> >> case the resolved reference in the FROM clause is equivalent to the
> >> base resource identifier, which means all of them are same document
> >> references, so these are queries against the SPARQL document rather
> >> than some external document. Such a query cannot yield in results.
> 
> tests for this in the test suite. I'd be good to add these, with the
> http://example.org/foo.rq and http://example.org/bar.rdf beeing real
> RDF documents and the query something that could return results. If
> an implementation returns any results, it's buggy. As I understand it.
-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Monday, 20 February 2006 15:58:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:14:50 GMT