W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > January to March 2011

Re: Draft response to GK-1

From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2011 09:34:57 +0000
Message-ID: <4D58F741.3080901@epimorphics.com>
To: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
CC: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>, SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>


On 14/02/11 09:17, Axel Polleres wrote:
> Hi steve,
>
> On 8 Feb 2011, at 16:31, Steve Harris wrote:
>
...
>
>> He raises a reasonable point about the interaction of ORDER BY,
>> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/query-1.1/rq25.xml#convertSolMod
>> could be construed as meaning that ORDER is preserved in aggregate
>> operations, though the algebra does say it's operations on
>> multisets.
>
> Is this something that needs to be discussed? Could an alternative
> behaviour to the current one be achieved with reasonable effort and
> the time/resources we still have?

This relates to Jeen's point about GROUP_CONCAT and ORDER BY

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2011Feb/0004.html

Maybe we should add "; ORDER BY" to GROUP_CONCAT.

	Andy
Received on Monday, 14 February 2011 09:35:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:45 GMT