- From: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
- Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2012 13:06:45 -0400
- To: public-rdf-dawg-comments <public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org>
Lee pointed out a small mistake off-list . . . On Fri, 2012-07-20 at 12:18 -0400, David Booth wrote: > Regarding this: > http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-query/#construct > [[ > If any such instantiation produces a triple containing an unbound > variable or an illegal RDF construct, such as a literal in subject or > predicate position, then that triple is not included in the output RDF > graph. > ]] > > This really bothers me, because: (a) it unnecessarily couples SPARQL to > a controversial decision in the RDF WG that may well change in the > future, i.e., the prohibition against literals as subjects; and (b) it > forces a conforming implementation to perform checks that its user may > not want or need. > > If a user chooses to generate invalid RDF then that is his/her business. > The SPARQL spec should not prohibit it. If a particular implementation > offers the feature of performing this check, then that is fine. But it > is unnecessarily draconian to require all implementations to do it. > > I suggest changing the above to: > [[ > If any such instantiation produces a triple containing an unbound > variable then that triple MUST NOT be included in the output RDF graph. > Otherwise, if any such instantiation produces a triple containing any > illegal RDF construct, such as a literal in subject or predicate > position, then that triple MAY be excluded from the output RDF graph. > ]] Since the output in such a case would not be legal RDF, I should have worded that last phrase as: " . . . then that triple MAY be excluded from the output graph." -- David Booth, Ph.D. http://dbooth.org/ Opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of his employer.
Received on Friday, 20 July 2012 17:07:14 UTC