- From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
- Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2013 13:42:53 +0000
- To: public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org
Yes - it could have been defined as a set (and is in the signature of the subsidiary function). It is an much a remnant of the previous definitions where multiple matches were handled. Thank you for the comment, Andy On 22/03/13 19:02, Serena Pallecchi wrote: > Hi all, > I'm studing the definition of function ALP. > The document http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-query/#PropertyPathPatterns > defines the variable V as multiset but it seems that an element is put > inside V at most once. > If it's right, I can say that V is a simple set because the cardinality > of all its elements is always 1. Am I wrong? > Thanks all. > Best regards. > -Serena- > >
Received on Saturday, 23 March 2013 13:43:25 UTC