W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > April to June 2010

Re: issue round-up, part 1

From: Lee Feigenbaum <lee@thefigtrees.net>
Date: Mon, 17 May 2010 20:49:12 -0400
Message-ID: <4BF1E408.5090401@thefigtrees.net>
To: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@talis.com>
CC: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On 5/17/2010 6:11 PM, Andy Seaborne wrote:
>> PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-5, ISSUE-6, ISSUE-7, and ISSUE-13 with no change,
>> noting that SPARQL 1.1 will only allow SELECT subqueries within the
>> query pattern.
>
> Agree to close on the understanding that "ASK queries in FILTERs" are
> covered by EXIST/NOT EXISTS in FILTERs.

Right, this was my intention/understanding as well.

>> PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-8 with the consensus that subqueries share the
>> same RDF dataset as their parent query, and that FROM and FROM NAMED
>> clauses are not permitted in subqueries.
>
> Agreed with the understanding that active graph of the outer query is is
> the initial active graph of the subquery.

I'm (personally) fine with this -- let's discuss it briefly before 
resolving tomorrow.

>
>> PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-14 with the consensus that SPARQL 1.1 defines the
>> following aggregates: COUNT, SUM, MIN, MAX, AVG, GROUP_CONCAT, and
>> SAMPLE.
>
> Agreed.

thanks!

Lee

> Andy
>
Received on Tuesday, 18 May 2010 00:49:50 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:42 GMT