- From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
- Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 20:14:19 +0000
- To: axel@polleres.net
- Cc: Jos de Bruijn <debruijn@inf.unibz.it>, RIF <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
On 10 Mar 2008, at 20:05, Axel Polleres wrote: [snip] > SPARQL only allows this for graph patterns AFAIR, not for example > for constructed triples in the CONSTRUCT parts. That doesn't seem relevant. The point is that SPARQL can query semi- generalized graphs *and* that particular form of generalization is already "in the air". I'm not advocating anything, merely pointing out some connections. Of course, sparql also has query variables in predicate position...which isn't too far from bnodes in predicate positions. > So, since triples in patterns having literals in subject positions > cannot match any triple in standard RDF graphs anyway, and the > semantics of COSNTRUCTs is compatible to standard RDF... this > loosining of the original RDF restrictions in SPARQL is somewhat > redundant It wouldn't be against 2 > ... and does not extend standard RDF. Here though, it seems we do > propose to extend standard RDF. I think it pretty clearly does generalize standard RDF, albeit in an ineffectual way :) But whatev. Cheers, Bijan.
Received on Monday, 10 March 2008 20:12:12 UTC