- From: <Faisal.Alkhateeb@inrialpes.fr>
- Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 14:46:54 +0100
- To: public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org
Quoting Lee Feigenbaum <feigenbl@us.ibm.com>: > Hello Faisal, > > I received the following blank reply from you this morning; just wanted to > point that out in case the lack of content was an error. We'd appreciate a > reply on this issue to the public-dawg-comments list whenever you might > have a chance. > > thanks, > Lee > > Faisal.Alkhateeb@inrialpes.fr wrote on 03/06/2006 03:42:25 AM: > > > Quoting Lee Feigenbaum <feigenbl@us.ibm.com>: > > > > > > > > Hello Faisal, > > > > > > Faisal.Alkhateeb@inrialpes.fr wrote on 03/02/2006 05:29:44 AM: > > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > I have some questions regarding ORDER BY. If we have the following > > > > one: > > > > > > > > ORDER BY (lang (_:b)) > > > > How we can evaluate this and then ordering the set of solutions? > > > > > > > > Also if we have: > > > > > > > > ORDER BY (<http://example.org>) > > > > How we can order the results? > > > > > > The SPARQL Query Language specification does not define ordering on > > > bnodes; and while it does define ordering on IRIs, ordering by a > constant > > > IRI will, of course, not produce a total ordering. For both of these > > > cases, then, the following text from section 10.1.3 of the > specification > > > applies ( http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/rq23/#modOrderBy ): > > > > > > """ > > > If the ordering criteria do not specify the order of values, then the > > > ordering in the solution sequence is undefined. > > > """ > > > > > > > What are the semantics of Order Conditions when they don not > > > containvariables > > > > like the above examples? > > > > > > The semantics of ORDER BY are not altered by the presence or lack of > > > variables (though many instances of ORDER BY without variables will > (as > > > above) not result in a total ordering of the solutions). The text from > the > > > above cited section of the Last Call document reads: > > > > > > """ > > > The "<" operator (see the Operator Mapping) defines the relative order > of > > > pairs of numerics, xsd:dateTimes and xsd:strings. > > > > > > IRIs are ordered by comparing the character strings making up each IRI > > > > using the "<" operator. > > > > > > SPARQL also defines a fixed, arbitrary order between some kinds of RDF > > > > terms that would not otherwise be ordered. This arbitrary order is > > > necessary to provide slicing of query solutions by use of LIMIT and > > > OFFSET. > > > > > > 1. (Lowest) no value assigned to the variable or expression in this > > > > solution. > > > 2. Blank nodes > > > 3. IRIs > > > 4. RDF literals > > > 5. A plain literal is lower than an RDF literal with type > xsd:string of > > > the same lexical form. > > > > > > If the ordering criteria do not specify the order of values, then the > > > ordering in the solution sequence is undefined. > > > > > > Ordering a sequence of solutions always results in a sequence with the > > > > same number of solutions in it, even if the ordering criteria does not > > > > differentiate between two solutions. > > > """ > > > > > > Please let us know if you find this response satisfactory. > > > > > > thanks, > > > Lee > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
Received on Monday, 6 March 2006 13:47:02 UTC