On Apr 07, 2004, at 15:56, ext Eric Prud'hommeaux wrote: >> >> >>> The useful difference being if one >>> must ask a combinatorial factor of all the disjunction optoins. For >>> reference, see FatAnnotationQuery (EP-4) [1] where the query asks for >>> two properties that may be dc1.0 or 1.1. This seems like it would >>> require four queries in RDFQ. >> >> I think the issue here is that RDFQ may not provide for quite >> as tight a compression as other forms of expression, but one >> then has to weigh how often/widely complex boolean expressions >> will be needed/used. > > Can one express queries in RDFQ where an arbitrary subset of the terms > in the graph are logical disjuctions according to a popular definition > of "disjuction" [2] ? I don't mean "Can you use a query compiler to > caluculate the set of queries that will express the disjunction?" Perhaps not as presently defined. But being an RDF vocabulary, it would probably be straightforward to add. > > When characterizing the expressiveness of the query languages, we must > be honest and precise or there's no point in the exercise. > I agree. But I found some of your characterizations to have the bar set higher than it perhaps should be, i.e. "if cannot lift 200kg then conclude cannot lift any weight". Patrick -- Patrick Stickler Nokia, Finland patrick.stickler@nokia.comReceived on Thursday, 8 April 2004 02:42:02 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 1 October 2009 14:41:56 GMT