- From: Seaborne, Andy <andy.seaborne@hp.com>
- Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 22:16:01 +0000
- To: Ivan Mikhailov <imikhailov@openlinksw.com>
- CC: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
> -----Original Message----- > From: public-rdf-dawg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-rdf-dawg-request@w3.org] > On Behalf Of Ivan Mikhailov > Sent: 12 March 2009 21:49 > To: Steve Harris > Cc: SPARQL Working Group > Subject: Re: [sub-select] Some examples and discussion > > Hello all, > > > I'm curious as to the interplay between: > > > > projected expressions > > sub-selects > > assignment > > Is there a combination of these that makes the 3rd irrelevant? > > Sub-selects can't be avoided, period. Projected expressions can be > avoided if assignments are allowed --- just LET a fake variable and > return it. Assignments can be avoided if projected expressions are > allowed (but macroexpansion of LET may result a huge amount of text). Could you explain this point? In Steve's example, there is slightly more text in the sub-SELECT form. Andy > > I'd recommend to not choose 20 of 3 as soon as all 3 can be implemented. > Developers have enough reasons for headache, an artificial puzzle of > weird limitations of the language will not make them happy. > > Best Regards, > > Ivan Mikhailov > OpenLink Software > http://virtuoso.openlinksw.com > >
Received on Thursday, 12 March 2009 22:17:05 UTC