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

Prioritised list of open issues (query, my bits)

From: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2010 10:23:21 +0000
Message-Id: <24CC13FF-3A6E-4647-91F6-4D24D3906BB0@garlik.com>
To: Lee Feigenbaum <lee@thefigtrees.net>, Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>, "public-rdf-dawg@w3.org Group" <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Prioritised list of open issues

http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/14
Which aggregates to include

http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/16
Dealing with aggregates over mixed datatypes

http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/15
Extensibility of aggregate functions
  - Seems consensus on URI, less on whether DISTINCT should be allowed

Issues where I think there is already consensus.

http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/3
Subquery syntax (e.g. mandatory curly braces)
- I've not heard anyone speaking against braces recently.

http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/4
What is the variable scope between main queries and subqueries?
- Only projected variables have scope outside a subquery.

http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/12
Presence and syntactic detail of HAVING clause
- Seems consensus on the post-aggregate FILTER being called.

http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/35
Can aggregate functions take DISTINCT as an argument a la SELECT  
COUNT(DISTINCT ?X)?
- Seems consensus on yes.

http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/36
What happens when expressions are projected with the same name as an  
existing variable?
- Seems consensus on it being an error.

-- 
Steve Harris, Garlik Limited
2 Sheen Road, Richmond, TW9 1AE, UK
+44 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, 8 February 2010 10:23:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:41 GMT