- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 04 May 2004 17:29:29 -0500
- To: Farrukh Najmi <Farrukh.Najmi@Sun.COM>
- Cc: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On Tue, 2004-05-04 at 15:41, Farrukh Najmi wrote: > I have been scanning the list archives wondering how much discussion has > occurred on having a requirement to support > predicates with boolean operators (AND, OR, NOT). > > What I find is that there has been a few postings that talk about > Negation or Conjunction or Disjunction support as potential use cases or > requirements. > > However, when I read the latest Use Cases and Requirements draft I do > not believe I see a requirement that focuses explicitly on > supporting multiple predicates in the query syntax that can be combined > using boolean operators. Is this an explicit omission or > has it just been missed? I'm not sure. In the postings you have seen, is there a particular phrasing of the requirement that appeals to you? It's entirely possible that there is a requirement that the WG would support but nobody has managed to write it down yet. FYI, the implementations I am familiar with have limited support for disjunction and negation: limited to comparing datatype values. Perhaps some of the implementors would like to relate their experience? > If explicitly dropped as a requirement can > anyone explain the rationale for the decision. Thanks for your > help. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ see you at the WWW2004 in NY 17-22 May?
Received on Tuesday, 4 May 2004 18:29:21 UTC