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

Re: subgraph/entailment

From: Enrico Franconi <franconi@inf.unibz.it>
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2005 08:37:01 +0200
Message-Id: <101B5416-8983-41CA-97BC-365B8E11B1B4@inf.unibz.it>
Cc: jos.deroo@agfa.com, connolly@w3.org, public-rdf-dawg@w3.org, public-rdf-dawg-request@w3.org
To: bparsia@isr.umd.edu

On 8 Sep 2005, at 03:10, Bijan Parsia wrote:
> ---- Original message ----
>
>> Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2005 01:26:14 +0200
>> From: jos.deroo@agfa.com
>> Subject: Re: subgraph/entailment
>
> [snip]
>
>>> I should *not* get the bnode coming from the redundant
>>> triple, but simply {<http://example.org/book/book1>}.
>>
>> Otoh, for
>>
>> CONSTRUCT { ?x dc:title "SPARQL" }
>> WHERE { ?x dc:title "SPARQL" }
>>
>> I actually get
>>
>> <http://example.org/book/book1> dc:title "SPARQL".
>> _:b_0_ dc:title "SPARQL".
>>
>> which I assume to be fine, no?
>
> The result form shouldn't affect the (number of) results
> unless there's something expicit in the form which does that
> (which I don't think is true for construct). At least,
> that's what I would expect!

Indeed. I expect no bnode in this case too, independently on the type  
of query, since the answer should be the same as the one with the  
dataset without the bnode.

--e.
Received on Thursday, 8 September 2005 06:37:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:24 GMT