Re: initial set of aggregates test cases plus ACTION-210

On 23 Aug 2010, at 11:31, Andy Seaborne wrote:

> 
> The results for agg05/06 are agg04.srx and add07 is agg0-5.srx.  Looks
> wrong and fails.
> 
> If I change them to agg05.srx etc, I get the suite to pass.  I have
> checked in changes to manifest.ttl.

thanks for checking this!

> 
> But: observation: agg06.rq
> 
> ------------------------------------------
> PREFIX : <http://www.example.org>
> 
> SELECT ?P (COUNT(*) AS ?C)
> WHERE { ?S ?P ?O }
> HAVING (COUNT(*) > 0 )
> ------------------------------------------
> uses non-group key variable ?P in the SELECT line.
> 
thanks, that wad wrong, should've been without the ?P in the select.

> In ARQ, this results in, effectively, a new ?P (it's a different scope -
> the use in the group is hidden because only variable from the group key
> are in-scope and the mention of ?P in the SELECT line is a new,
> different ?P and is hence unbound).

Wouldn't we rather want this to be a syntax error (don't remember in detail, but I think we discussed this, need to check)

Axel


> 
>         Andy
> 
> On 23/08/2010 12:44 AM, Axel Polleres wrote:
> > I committed some initial aggregates test cases for COUNT, including some on COUNT(*).
> > Particularly agg06 covers:
> >
> > SELECT (COUNT(*) AS ?C) .... HAVING (COUNT(*)>  0 )
> >
> > as proposed in ACTION-210.
> >
> > Please check [1]. I still need to verify and include the aggregates test cases from
> > my earlier mail [2].
> >
> > Axel
> >
> > 1. http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/tests/data-sparql11/aggregates/
> 
> > 2. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JanMar/0609.html
>

Received on Monday, 23 August 2010 10:52:33 UTC