- From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
- Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2012 17:10:10 +0100
- To: public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org, David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
On 31/07/12 15:36, David Booth wrote: > On Mon, 2012-07-30 at 18:18 -0400, David Booth wrote: >> Suppose I LOAD a single file of NTriples into a named graph foo:, and >> that file contains some duplicate triples such as: >> >> _:bnode <http://example/ppp> <http://example/vvv> . >> _:bnode <http://example/ppp> <http://example/vvv> . >> _:bnode <http://example/ppp> <http://example/vvv> . >> >> According to the RDF Semantics, an RDF graph is a *set* of triples. >> Hence, AFAIK the above file represents an RDF graph containing *one* >> triple, and the graph is lean. >> >> If I then query that named graph as follows, how many solutions should I >> get? >> >> SELECT * WHERE { GRAPH foo: { ?s ?p ?v } } >> >> Is the SPARQL server permitted to return more than one solution (i.e., >> duplicates) in this case? >> >> I am aware of the DISTINCT keyword, but I always understood it as being >> intended for situations where the query could generate multiple >> candidate solutions, which is not the situation in this case. It seems >> a little weird if a SPARQL server might return multiple solutions in >> this case, but would it still be conforming to the SPARQL spec if it >> did? > > To further elaborate, if I issue this query in the above situation > > SELECT (COUNT(*) AS ?count) WHERE { GRAPH foo: { ?s ?p ?v } } > > would any number greater than zero be a conforming result for ?count ? > > Or in a more general sense, if DISTINCT is not used, are the only > semantically distinguishable values for COUNT: (a) zero; and (b) at > least one? Please see http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2012Jul/0029.html Please consider using the mailing list public-sparql-dev@w3.org for general questions. It allows for general discussion. Andy > > >
Received on Tuesday, 31 July 2012 16:10:42 UTC