- From: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2013 18:08:03 -0400
- To: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
- Cc: public-lod@w3.org
1) I can see Hugh's frustration that the RDF system is incomplete
in a way. You tell everyone you have a model which can
be used for anything and then make something which doesn't use it.
What's wrong with this picture?
Standardising/using/adopting http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/tests/result-set
would solve that.
(The file actually defines terms like
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/tests/result-set#resultVariable
without the ".n3")
2) Different (I think) from what you want Hugh, but something I have thought would be handy would b a CONSTRUCT * where it returns the sub graphs it matches as turtle, ideally without duplicates.
This would be nice for lots of things, such as extracting a subset of a dataset.
CONSTRUCT * WHERE { ?x name ?y; age ?a; ?p ?o.} FILTER { a > 18 }
Tim
On 2013-09 -23, at 07:03, Andy Seaborne wrote:
> DAWG did at one time work with result sets encoded in RDF for the testing work.
>
> As the WG progressed, it was clear that implementation of testing
> was based on result set comparison, and an impl needed to grok the XML results encoding anyway. Hence the need for the RDF form dwindled but it's still there:
>
> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/tests/result-set.n3
>
> Apache Jena will still produce it if you ask it nicely.
>
> Andy
>
>
Received on Monday, 23 September 2013 22:08:04 UTC