W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org > March 2008

Re: Another attempt...

From: Lee Feigenbaum <lee@thefigtrees.net>
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 20:43:23 -0400
Message-ID: <47E1B32B.7000006@thefigtrees.net>
To: Andrew Newman <andrewfnewman@gmail.com>
CC: Richard Newman <rnewman@twinql.com>, andy.seaborne@hp.com, Arjohn Kampman <arjohn.kampman@aduna-software.com>, "public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org" <public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org>

Andrew, I feel like I'm running in circles chasing my tail! I've chosen 
here to focus on one very specific part of your response to try one last 
time to find out whether you are disagreeing with the SPARQL design or 
whether you believe the specification to be an incomplete description of 
the language design.

Andrew Newman wrote:
> On 19/03/2008, Lee Feigenbaum <lee@thefigtrees.net> wrote:
>> Andrew Newman wrote:

>>  > The results don't make sense with respect to JOIN identity (which is
>>  > defined in the SPARQL specification).  Unless SPARQL is creating its
>>  > own algebra (if it is it has a lot of explaining to do - which I'm
>>  > happy to read) and is ignoring existing set and/or bag algebra then
>>  > the current results being returned by most/all SPARQL implementations
>>  > is wrong.
>>
>>
>> Again, are you saying wrong in the sense of:
>>
>>  1) the implementations do not abide by the SPARQL specification, or
>>  2) the implementations abide by the specification, which is not the
>>  results you'd desire to see?
>>
> 
> So while the specification has gone a long way to try and be enough to
> create an implementation by itself I don't think it's quite there yet.
>  There's pre-requisite knowledge that is not in the specification.

This part _seems_ to indicate to me that you believe there to be at 
least one query and RDF dataset for which the SPARQL specification is 
not sufficient to determine what results an implementation should 
return. Could you please provide such a query, a dataset for the query, 
and the point at which you see an ambiguity in the specification as to 
how to evaluate the query against the dataset? (I understand that you 
may be saying that this applies to a large class of queries & datasets; 
I'm only asking for one example, please.)

Lee
Received on Thursday, 20 March 2008 00:44:02 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 20 March 2008 00:44:03 GMT