- From: Rob Vesse <rav08r@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2010 15:24:31 -0000
- To: <public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <EMEW3|96cd97a82f19f651020153e11b9653bdm1OFOX06rav08r|ecs.soton.ac.uk|004001cab6>
With regards to my previous comments and the Working Group's response [1] I would like to make some further comments. Aggregates - I do not like the proposed SEPARATOR syntax for GROUP_CONCAT at all, if you are going to include GROUP_CONCAT simply leave it as a single argument with a standard separator and then specify that fn:string-join() must be supported by SPARQL 1.1 as a function since I believe the WG intends to specify a subset of XPath and other common functions that implementations should support? Property Paths - Having asked Steve Harris for clarification of this off-list I'd like to make the following comment about simple property paths. The draft states that simple paths can be transformed to algebra expressions and executed as such (I've implemented this in my implementation) but the specification also states that property paths should eliminate duplicates. In the case where paths can be transformed to a BGP is it still necessary to eliminate duplicates? Rob Vesse PhD Student IAM Group Bay 20, Room 4027, Building 32 Electronics & Computer Science University of Southampton SO17 1BJ [1] http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/CommentResponse:RV-2
Received on Friday, 26 February 2010 13:51:41 UTC