- From: Seaborne, Andy <andy.seaborne@hp.com>
- Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 09:09:49 +0000
- To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- CC: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Dan Connolly wrote: > Bob write: > > -------- > First, I am assuming that the > following query returns no bindings: > > SELECT ?x ?y > WHERE { ?book dc10:title ?x } > > I shouldn't since it doesn't refer to OPTIONAL or UNION within the query, and the > spec cites those as prerequisites for allowing unbound values. > -------- > -- > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2005Mar/0048.html > > but I don't see it that way... my reading of > http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/rq23/#select > is that SELECT (i.e. projection) doesn't cause solutions > to get rejected. The ?y is just noise. Correct. > > > Would somebody please add this as a test case? EricP? > 3 added (1 var in query, one in select; 1 in query, 2 in select; 2 in query, 1 in select (carefully avoiding any issues about DISTINCT). Andy
Received on Tuesday, 22 March 2005 09:11:14 UTC