Re: $this in Aggregations

With the next commit, I have switched to using "projects" to talk about 
the result variables of a query, referencing

     https://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-query/#selectproject

Holger


On 9/02/2017 8:50, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
> So to get a clear picture of what is going on requires looking at the email
> thread, the issue, and the issue resolution, not all of which reference each
> other.  Not ideal by any means but perhaps acceptable in this case.  Remember
> that the work of the working group is going to be checked to ensure that it
> has provided substantive responses for all comments.
>
> As far as the technical aspects of the issue are concerned, the replacement
> text uses "result variable" but this term is not defined.  The same term is
> also used elsewhere in the document.
>
> Peter F. Patel-Schneider
> Nuance Communications
>
>
> The query must project the result variable <code>this</code> in its SELECT clause.
>
> On 02/08/2017 11:09 AM, Irene Polikoff wrote:
>> Peter,
>>
>> This issue is about the use of $this in aggregations. There was a proposal on
>> the WG wiki to close issue-208 as addressed in the edit described
>> in https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-shapes/2016Nov/0027.html.
>> The edit was made in November 2016.
>>
>> By the time the WG got to deciding on formally closing this issue in January
>> 2017, the edit mentioned above was superseded by the removal of the sentence
>> about aggregation from the spec.
>>
>> When editors explained this, the resolution was updated with “-made obsolete”,
>> so the WG decision was to close the issue as first addressed by the edit and
>> then, with further changes in the spec, made obsolete.
>>
>> If you still see an issue in this area, please describe it based on the
>> current content of the document.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Irene
>>
>>
>>> On Feb 8, 2017, at 9:05 AM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com
>>> <mailto:pfpschneider@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 02/07/2017 10:33 PM, Holger Knublauch wrote:
>>>> Peter,
>>>>
>>>> you had requested we continue this ISSUE-208 in its original email thread.
>>>>
>>>> We have meanwhile closed this issue as documented here:
>>>>
>>>>     https://www.w3.org/2017/01/18-shapes-minutes.html
>>>>
>>>> I believe your last comment on this topic was:
>>>>
>>>> I don't think that the new wording conforms to that used in SPARQL, so there
>>>> are still changes required here.  Furthermore, the "Furthermore" sentence is
>>>> still in the document.
>>>>
>>>> The "Furthermore" sentence had been removed a while ago. I don't see a problem
>>>> with the wording with regards to SPARQL. Could you clarify what you think is
>>>> left to do here. The latest version of this sentence is:
>>>>
>>>> The SPARQL query derived from the value of <code>sh:select</code> returns the
>>>> result variable <code>this</code> in its SELECT clause.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> Holger
>>> The resolution of the ISSUE-208 may have been overturned somehow as the
>>> wording that was introduced to resolve it is no longer in the document.  What
>>> is the current wording that is supposed to resolve this issue?
>>>
>>> Peter F. Patel-Schneider
>>> Nuance Communications
>>>
>>>

Received on Thursday, 2 March 2017 00:05:42 UTC