W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > July to September 2004

RE: Proposed XQuery requirement and/or objective

From: Howard Katz <howardk@fatdog.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 14:11:53 -0700
To: "Rob Shearer" <Rob.Shearer@networkinference.com>, "Steve Harris" <S.W.Harris@ecs.soton.ac.uk>, <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <IKEOLCDFPBBPPAHGNKKOAEJGENAA.howardk@fatdog.com>

Hmm, I'm much more partial to that solution now than when you first
presented it to me. Not sure why. I was probably so focused on the deep
ineffable beauty :-) of my own design that I wasn't that open to other
possibilities. Or maybe I was thinking you only accessed the XML
serialization, which isn't all that interesting. In any event I need to mull
some more ...

Howard

> The idea is that 'asserted()' is in fact an external function; in the
> simplest case we're assuming the RDF data is just sitting in the context
> somehow, not necessarily accessible in any way other than these external
> functions.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Howard Katz [mailto:howardk@fatdog.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2004 10:20 AM
> > To: Rob Shearer; Steve Harris; public-rdf-dawg@w3.org
> > Subject: RE: Proposed XQuery requirement and/or objective
> >
> > Steve,
> >
> > Just to clarify Rob's example a bit (you don't mind, do you, Rob?):
> >
> > 1) Rob's using an XML document with one or more <Person>
> > elements in it. It
> > looks like this could be any sort of XML document, not necessarily an
> > RDF/XML serialization. (Is that correct, Rob?)
> >
> > 1) His use of "doc(http://foo/people.xml)/Person" implies a
> > single document
> > with a single <Person> as the root element. Since that's not
> > very useful,
> > it's more likely he meant to say:
> >
> >     doc( http://foo/people.xml" )//Person
> >
> > which implies that the document has mulitple <Person>
> > elements in it, the
> > more likely scenario; the descendant operator (//) then
> > dereferences off the
> > single document node returned by doc() and grabs all its
> > <Person> elements
> > at one fell swoop.
> >
> > 2) If it's straightforward XML and didn't have any xmlns: namespace
> > declaration against <Person>, you don't need a namespace
> > prefix to retrieve
> > it via XPath.
> >
> > 3) Whether the step operator is "/" or "//", neither usage implies an
> > rdf:type. Rob's working in XML and he's getting XML <Person>
> > elements back,
> > not RDF.
> >
> > Rob:
> > Just to clarify something, when you say:
> >
> >     asserted( $member/URI, ...#worksFor, ...#NetworkInference )
> >
> > is asserted() an external function (ie, one that's allowed to
> > manipulate
> > *anything*, not necessarily just items that are in the XQuery
> > data model)
> > that has access to an actual RDF graph or graphs and is doing
> > "real" RDF
> > querying against their triples directly? That would make
> > sense to me if so.
> >
> > Howard
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: public-rdf-dawg-request@w3.org
> > > [mailto:public-rdf-dawg-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Rob Shearer
> > > Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2004 9:18 AM
> > > To: Steve Harris; public-rdf-dawg@w3.org
> > > Subject: RE: Proposed XQuery requirement and/or objective
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > > for $member in doc(http://foo/people.xml)/Person
> > > > > where asserted($member/URI, http://foo#worksFor,
> > > > http://foo#NetworkInference)
> > > > > return $member/name
> > > >
> > > > Wouldn't "Person" in the first line require some
> > > > namespace/prefix? Also, I
> > > > dont quite understand why the / after doc() implies the
> > > > rdf:type part of the
> > > > 	($memeber  rdf:type  foo:Person)
> > > > triple. Is it just shorthand? if so, why "/"?
> > >
> > > No; this example was meant to demonstrate use of XML along with RDF
> > > stuff, so the XPath expression was just selecting all the top-level
> > > <Person> elements in some XML doc in the conventional way.
> > Everything
> > > but the asserted() call is vanilla XQuery.
> > >
> >
> >
Received on Tuesday, 20 July 2004 17:10:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:20 GMT