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

Re: DISTINCT with aggregates

From: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2009 05:49:14 +0000
Message-Id: <C0793441-58CB-4FEB-BC99-F32D721A0222@garlik.com>
To: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On 13 Nov 2009, at 14:21, Lee Feigenbaum wrote:
> I guess this is sort of related to the question of a whether we want  
> a keyword to introduce custom aggregate functions: how important is  
> it to minimize the number of invalid queries that are syntactically  
> valid?
>
> I believe in SPARQL 1.0 the only such query involves bnode labels  
> spanning BGPs?

No, there are a few others, for example using qnames without a  
matching PREFIX, FILTERing on variables that aren't mentioned and so on.

There's also things like projecting * when there's no variables, or  
projecting unmentioned variables. I'm not sure if they're technically  
errors, but it still pays to look out for them to issue a warning or  
something.

- 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 Saturday, 14 November 2009 05:49:43 GMT

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