Re: Use case: AFS-1: "Find the resource for the person called 'John S mith'"

>>Very good starting point. Formally may I suggest
>>we could use logic programming notation such
>>
>>(X, FN:name, "John Smith")
> 
> 
> Umm... why? Is that a notation we expect our audience to
> use when making their feature requests?

I think logic programming serves at this point as a nice
abstract syntax for which we can find the concrete syntax
later. I don't expect feature request arise in this format
but I could imagine that within this WG we find this notation
easy to formalize the feature. Is this a good assumption?

>>The evaluation result would then be either bindings
>>for X or if closure is a requirement, we would return
>>all triples with X bound to a different value.
>>
>>I would like to see closure implemented with the query
>>language in order to enable refined queries over
>>the result graph.
> 
> 
> Can you motivate this feature with a use case? i.e.
> a plausible story from real life?

== Task & Roles

A client software wishes to connect to server software
to find out if it could find an object whose property
matches certain value.

== Value & Why

If the query result is a graph, the client can cache
the query result and run another query over the query
result. This is far more efficient than repeating the
query over to the server again with more criteria set.

== Description

Looking for content which is written in French
(X, dc:language, "fr") and returning all known
properties for X should be a complete graph with
(X, P1, V1), (X, P2, V2), ... , (X, Pn, Vn) for
which another query can be run upon with e.g.
additional constraint (X, dc:creator, "John Smith") set.

-- 
Janne Saarela <janne.saarela@profium.com>
Profium, Lars Sonckin kaari 12, 02600 Espoo, Finland
Tel. +358 (0)9 855 98 000 Fax. +358 (0)9 855 98 002
Mob. +358 (0)40 508 4767  Internet: http://www.profium.com

Received on Thursday, 11 March 2004 14:49:34 UTC