- From: Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2005 10:54:10 -0400
- To: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <20050906145410.GB17752@w3.org>
On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 09:24:54AM -0400, Tim Berners-Lee wrote: > > Here I understand Yosi coded up cwm's SPARQL implementation with > special SPARQL-compatible builtins written so as to match the spec. > That doesn't mean that the spec is right or sensible or logical. :-) I have spoken with TimBL and I believe that changing the text [[ A value disjunction that encounters a type error on only one branch will return the result of evaluating the other branch. ]] to [[ A value disjunction that encounters a type error on only one branch will return TRUE if the other branch is TRUE and an error if the other branch is FALSE. ]] will satisfy him. The truth table below describes the changes: left right result T T T T F T F T T F F F T E T F E F/E Was FALSE, now Error E T T E F F/E Was FALSE, now Error E E E I find either easy to implement. Tim's motivation is to give the rule F || X ==> X False OR X evaluates to X priority. Opinions? http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/rq23/#func-logical-or > On Aug 8, 2005, at 15:03, Dan Connolly wrote: > > >On Mon, 2005-08-08 at 13:42 -0500, Dan Connolly wrote: > > > >>FYI, there's another test case available to study: > >> > >>Roman numeral test Dave Beckett (Monday, 8 August) > >>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2005JulSep/ > >>0228.html > >> > >>-> > >> > >>http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/tests/data/ValueTesting/roman.rq > >>http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/tests/data/ValueTesting/roman.n3 > >>http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/tests/data/ValueTesting/roman- > >>result.n3 > >> > >> > >>Yosi, if you could look at that soon, I'd appreciate it. > >> > > > >I just looked at it with that cwm sparql server on mr-burns, yosi. > > > >It gives 0 results, which agrees with the last call design > >(and disagrees with the roman-results.n3 sketch). > > > >TimBL, can you confirm that cwm is giving 0 results by design? > > > > > > > >>The valueTesting issue (http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/ > >>issues#valueTesting ) > >>is on the agenda for tomorrow's teleconference, and it would > >>be nice to have input from the cwm/swap project in hand. > >> > >[...] > > > -- -eric office: +81.466.49.1170 W3C, Keio Research Institute at SFC, Shonan Fujisawa Campus, Keio University, 5322 Endo, Fujisawa, Kanagawa 252-8520 JAPAN +1.617.258.5741 NE43-344, MIT, Cambridge, MA 02144 USA cell: +81.90.6533.3882 (eric@w3.org) Feel free to forward this message to any list for any purpose other than email address distribution.
Received on Tuesday, 6 September 2005 14:54:22 UTC