W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > July to September 2006

Re: Blank node identifiers in FILTER clauses

From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2006 11:30:14 -0500
Message-Id: <p06230904c0d1982dddc1@[10.100.0.28]>
To: "Seaborne, Andy" <andy.seaborne@hp.com>
Cc: Fred Zemke <fred.zemke@oracle.com>, public-rdf-dawg@w3.org

>>
>>I see four possible resolutions:
>>
>>1. (My preference) the scope of a blank node identifier is
>>an entire FilteredBasicGraphPattern, not just a basic graph
>>pattern.  To do this, we need to extend the definitions in
>>section 2.5 so that they define the solutions of a
>>FilteredBasicGraphPattern rather than just the solutions of a
>>basic graph pattern.  I can see how to do this with the
>>simple entailment mapping definition; I don't see how to do
>>this with the general E-entailment definition.
>
>My preference as well.
>
>I would remove the possibility of blank nodes (and general expressions) in the
>functions isIRI/isLiteral/isBlank, restricting them to named variables only,
>because these really work on the terms of the bindings, not the values.
>
>I would like to see a proposal for (1) from one or more of the original
>contributors of the current text (Enrico, Bijan, Pat).

I will try to get to this in about a week, if nobody else beats me to 
it. I havnt got time before then to focus down to the details closely 
enough.

Pat
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC		(850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973   home
40 South Alcaniz St.	(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola			(850)202 4440   fax
FL 32502			(850)291 0667    cell
phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
Received on Wednesday, 5 July 2006 16:30:35 GMT

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