W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > October to December 2009

Re: More on the evil examples... and "What really happened to Limit per Resource?"

From: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 10:35:05 +0000
Cc: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org
Message-Id: <581F873D-4CF6-4CEC-86CB-4B5E12BFC1D5@garlik.com>
To: Kjetil Kjernsmo <kjetil@kjernsmo.net>
On 8 Nov 2009, at 21:33, Kjetil Kjernsmo wrote:

> On Saturday 7. November 2009 04:12:03 Lee Feigenbaum wrote:
>>> This very use case was mentioned very early in the game as something
>>> several people wanted to have:
>>> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:LimitPerResource
>>> and, if I remember correctly, the champions for that use case (Alex,
>>> Kjetil) settled their fights for this feature purely on the
>>> observation that it would be doable with subselect.
>
> Yeah, reluctantly, as Steve said in the F2F1 something like "trust  
> me, this
> is going to be simple enough to do, we need it too".

And it is, just using aggregates not sub-SELECTS. Mea culpa.

- Steve

-- 
Steve Harris, CTO, Garlik Limited
2 Sheen Road, Richmond, TW9 1AE, UK
+44(0)20 8973 2465  http://www.garlik.com/
Registered in England and Wales 535 7233 VAT # 849 0517 11
Registered office: Thames House, Portsmouth Road, Esher, Surrey, KT10  
9AD
Received on Monday, 9 November 2009 10:35:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:40 GMT