- From: Daniel Hernandez <daniel@degu.cl>
- Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2018 11:43:26 -0300
- To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
- Cc: "Martynas Jusevičius" <martynas@atomgraph.com>, <public-sparql-exists@w3.org>
Hi, Maybe Peter did not notice that this is not the report we submitted in 2016, but a new one (they have a similar name). In 2016, Peter read our first paper and then claimed for attention in the mailing list of SPARQL. Andy Seaborne proposed the creation of at this community work. There were several proposals, e.g., by Peter and David Martin in an ISWC poster, and by Andy Seaborne in this mailing list. Also, implementations are implicitly proposals. The primary approach used by the W3C Community Group to clarify these proposals was presenting example queries. A general criterion is needed to choose one of them, not only the first that fix all the reported issues. Our last report addresses this goal by providing a logical foundation for substitution. We extend known translations from SPARQL to Datalog to support the EXISTS clause. In our opinion, this setting sheds light on the fundamental issues going at the problems of substitution in SPARQL. We still think that this issue deserves attention. It is moribund but not dead ;-) Would be great if the discussion in the WG retakes this problem. We would be delighted to contribute to addressing it. Daniel ---- On jue, 18 ene 2018 11:52:26 -0300 Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com> wrote ---- > Indeed. That paper was part of the impetus to get this effort started. > > > peter > > > PS: Unfortunately, the effort is currently moribund. > > > On 01/18/2018 04:38 AM, Martynas Jusevičius wrote: > > Hi, > > > > not sure if this article has been discussed or taken into account, but it > > seems relevant: > > https://arxiv.org/pdf/1801.04387.pdf > > > > > > Martynas > > atomgraph.com <http://atomgraph.com> > > >
Received on Friday, 19 January 2018 14:43:54 UTC