W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > April to June 2005

Re: Updated definitions (constraint)

From: Seaborne, Andy <andy.seaborne@hp.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2005 13:51:12 +0100
Message-ID: <42B2C740.3030001@hp.com>
To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
CC: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>



Dan Connolly wrote:
> On Jun 16, 2005, at 7:44 AM, Dan Connolly wrote:
> 
>>On Jun 16, 2005, at 7:15 AM, Seaborne, Andy wrote:
>>
>>>  In a group, all the group elements have to "pass" a solution for 
>>>the groiup to match a solution.
>>
>>Ah... that's what I was missing. Thanks.
>>
>>http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/rq23/#defn_GroupGraphPatter
> 
> 
> Hmm... what about this case?
> 
> SELECT ?x WHERE { FILTER ( ?x < 10 ) }.
> 
> That's got a bzillion solutions, right? Maybe we need a special case 
> for that?
> Or maybe it's already syntactically illegal or something?

I think it depends on the evaluation of filter.  As things stand, I read that as 
an attempt to do "?x < 10" with no bound x hence false.  That right, Eric?

	Andy


See also:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2005Jun/0034.html
Received on Friday, 17 June 2005 12:53:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:23 GMT