- From: Graham Klyne <gk@ninebynine.org>
- Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 10:44:04 +0100
- To: public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org
I can't reliably figure this:
Does a query submitted with "CONSTRUCT *" always return a graph equivalent
to a query submitted with "CONSTRUCT p", where p is the query pattern
submitted?
If not, why not (e.g. please show counter-example)?
(If true, this greatly simplifies my implementation.)
...
Partly answering my own question, I think this holds for simple query
patterns, but doesn't obviously extend to more complex patterns involving
optional or alternative elements. I'm trying to figure out a way to
construct the result graph from just the variable binding results. Hmmm...
maybe I can introduce some additional hidden variable bindings to track the
optional/alternative choices matched
...
Looking more closely at OPTIONAL and UNION, I notice that the following may
give rise to different results:
OPTIONAL a
a UNION {}
I mention this because in past work, I have implemented optional matching
as a special case of alternative matching, where my alternative was a
match-first-alternative rather than match-any-alternatives.
(I'm not asking for any change here, just making an observation.)
#g
------------
Graham Klyne
For email:
http://www.ninebynine.org/#Contact
Received on Friday, 8 April 2005 09:42:13 UTC