W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > April to June 2004

Re: iTQL evaluation

From: Kendall Clark <kendall@monkeyfist.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 12:30:40 -0400
To: Simon Raboczi <raboczi@tucanatech.com>
Cc: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org
Message-ID: <20040607163040.GD5420@monkeyfist.com>

On Mon, Jun 07, 2004 at 11:25:05AM -0400, Simon Raboczi wrote:

> >[itql-] 3.6 Optional Match
> Optional matching is performed using "subquery()" aggregate functions 
> in the "select" clause.

I wondered about this; but couldn't decide if that was *really*
satisfying the requirement. I'm glad to have the record corrected, but
I'm not sure I really understand this just yet.

Can you say more about this, Simon? One uses a subquery as part of a
search which may fail to match?

> There actually is an "alias" command in an iTQL session which functions 
> similarly to the "USING" and "USING NAMESPACE" clauses in RDQL and 
> SerQL respectively.  

I guess I should have been more clean; "alias" didn't seem to be part
of the query language per se. It has the same effect -- and I like
this design idea; it reminds me of the Haskell prologue -- but for
small devices, say, it's not as helpful as USING, IMO.

> wherever it appeared in subsequent commands.  What iTQL certainly does 
> egregiously is to use the same <> syntax for both URI references and 
> qname abbreviations.  

Yeah, that was one part of the syntax which is not so human-friendly,
for met at least.

> The $ prefix for variables is actually based on XPath rather than Perl. 
>  Given an arbitrary choice, we figured it should look like other W3C 
> standards.  :)

Fair enough. :>

Thanks for correcting my mistakes!

Received on Monday, 7 June 2004 12:32:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:00:27 UTC