- From: Lee Feigenbaum <feigenbl@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2006 08:46:45 -0500
- To: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Enrico Franconi wrote on 02/28/2006 07:45:00 PM: > On 1 Mar 2006, at 00:02, Pat Hayes wrote: > >> - if we don't have BGP', the (abstract syntax representation of > >> the) answer set can not use bnodes which appear in the (abstract > >> syntax representation of the) query; > > > > That is true > > That's enough for me. Perhaps for you it is :-), but as someone who is striving to put a good faith effort to fully understand this debate to both make informed decisions in the future and to be able to educate SPARQL users and implementors within my organization, I'd like to ask you, Enrico, to address the full response that Pat made rather than to take these three words out of context. In particular, if I understand Pat correctly (please correct me if I do not), then he is stating that BGP' enables an ability that has never been discussed by the DAWG (presumably that does not have approved use cases or requirements driving it?) and also an ability for which no work has been done to fully enable due to other factors. Specifically, Pat observes that the SPARQL result document explicitly scopes bnode IDs to that document, and so there is no current mechanism by which an answer document could (in the concrete syntax) refer to bnodes mentioned in the query. (Pat writes: "it would involve having partially overlapping bnode scopes between the query and answer documents") Could you please spare a few sentences (or a pointer to an earlier message if you feel this has already been addressed) that addresses these two points? many thanks, Lee
Received on Wednesday, 1 March 2006 13:47:10 UTC