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

Re: Operational definition of SPARQL algebra

From: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 15:49:16 +0100
Message-Id: <ABBF0413-EC90-4DD4-927C-CFD0471B8395@garlik.com>
Cc: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
To: andy.seaborne@hp.com


On 20 Oct 2006, at 14:18, Seaborne, Andy wrote:

>
> No need for Chilean proposal 4 for additional restrictions - which  
> I feel is
> too strong anyway (example below):
>
> SELECT *
> {
>     ?x rdf:type skos:Concept .
>     OPTIONAL { ?x skos:prefLabel ?label }
>     OPTIONAL { ?x skos:altLabel  ?label }
> }
>

For the record, I'm still very much against this kind of construct  
(variables that appear only in OPTIONAL and appear in > 1 OPTIONAL).  
I think it's not at all clear what it means (to humans) and adds an  
unnecessary implementation burden.

I'm guessing that the example given above is just a hack to get round  
the fact that we can't do SELECT COALESCE(?refLabel, ?altLabel)?

- Steve
Received on Friday, 20 October 2006 14:49:55 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:27 GMT