Re: SPARQL results in RDF

That idea seems very similar to the "DELETE WHERE" already in SPARQL 1.1,
so maybe to be consistent with that existing syntax it should be "CONSTRUCT
WHERE"


On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 3:08 PM, Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org> wrote:

>
>
> 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
> >
> >
>
>
>