W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org > August 2012

Re: BIND semantics (2)

From: james anderson <james@dydra.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2012 09:06:36 +0200
Message-Id: <79C221A2-93EF-4466-ACA1-CC95E1E2AEE6@dydra.com>
Cc: public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org, Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
To: Jeremy Carroll <jeremy@topquadrant.com>
good morning, mr carroll;

would it be possible for you to add to your note an example dataset  
and the results you have obtained - or would expect to obtain, for  
the respective queries.  mr knublauch's original comment expressed a  
concern which can be understood to have already been addressed by the  
current specified semantics. examples would help to clarify the concern.

to wit, if you look at http://dydra.com/jhacker/example-graph/ you  
will find our interpretation of the specification. you will find  
there, copies of the queries from your message, edited to correct the  
projection syntax. all queries return the same binding for ?y.

best regards, from berlin,

On 2012-08-14, at 07:24 , Jeremy Carroll wrote:

> This is a formal last call comment on
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-sparql11-query-20120724/
> following on from my colleague's comment
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/ 
> 2012Aug/0014.html
> Do the following sections of the specification contradict each other?
> A) http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-sparql11-query-20120724/ 
> #selectExpressions
> "The rules of assignment in SELECT expression are the same as for  
> assignment in BIND."
> B) http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-sparql11-query-20120724/ 
> #sparqlTranslateBindAssignments
> C) http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-sparql11-query-20120724/ 
> #sparqlSelectExpressions
> [Aside: the text in (A) articulates my understanding of the outcome  
> of the Santa Clara face 2 face, where this topic was discussed]
[ ... ]

james anderson | james@datagraph.org | james@dydra.com | http:// 
Received on Tuesday, 14 August 2012 07:04:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:52:13 UTC