Re: allow implicitly unbound variables in SPARQL results? (formatting fixed)

On Dec 14, 2005, at 12:08 PM, Lee Feigenbaum wrote:

> To reply to two points at once; you asked for clarification of in  
> what way
> the collapsed option is not fully-functional. It is not fully  
> functional
> in that it does not support position-based indexing as the LC  
> design does.

Thanks, Lee. Thought that's what you meant.

>
> If that is not a desirable property, then I believe that the best  
> approach
> is to eliminate this requirement from the results format (and then  
> going
> with option 'c' is less objectionable).

I find that I do no desire it, nor do I object to it. :>

Cheers,
Kendall