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

Re: limit per resource rethought...

From: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2010 13:43:16 +0100
Cc: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <AD30C645-58DE-4E5F-9A68-C03B586E0B2B@garlik.com>
To: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
On 2010-08-13, at 22:37, Andy Seaborne wrote:
> 
> On 13/08/10 10:38, Steve Harris wrote:
>>> >>  SELECT ?p (SCALAR(1, DESC ?name) AS ?n1) (SCALAR(2, DESC ?name) AS ?n2) (SCALAR(3, DESC ?name) AS ?n3)
>>> 
>>> clever use of the error condition:-)
> > It is?
> 
> If an error were a error in the query this would not work if there were less than 3 ?name.  As it stands, you get the cardinality you want by the fact that an error in the SELECT expression causes no binding but the query is not itself an error.

Oh, I see. I thought maybe I was missing some great subtlety. I think it's more of a proof-point that we made the right decision there.

- Steve

-- 
Steve Harris, CTO, Garlik Limited
1-3 Halford Road, Richmond, TW10 6AW, UK
+44 20 8439 8203  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 August 2010 12:43:50 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:43 GMT