Re: [Fwd: major technical: no subqueries]

Dan Connolly wrote:
> This seems like a reasonably coherent argument for a new requirement,
> complete with rationale and use case.
> 
> If you support this requirement and would like to see us add it
> to the critical path, please say so.
> 
> If not, please help me come up with justification that might
> satisfy the commentor.


The query :

SELECT ?name
WHERE { ?x foaf:givenName ?name .
        FILTER ( ! ( ASK ?date WHERE { ?x dc:date ?date } ) ) }

is very much like:

SELECT ?name
WHERE { ?x foaf:givenName ?name .
        UNSAID { ?x dc:date ?date }
       }

Close issue:
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/issues#unsaid

Closed at Helsinki:
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/ftf4.html#item04

	Andy