- From: Seaborne, Andy <andy.seaborne@hp.com>
- Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 17:58:42 +0000
- To: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
In the grammar [1], I didn’t put in syntax for custom aggregates. I'm assuming that the ability to be able to specify a URI for an aggregate function is a useful extension point.
An aggregate in SPARQL is a function that takes a set of query solutions and produces one or more values query solutions which include the group by variables and any aggregate variable/values. It's "or more" for the case of MIN() returning an answer for the MIN number, the MIN string, MIN dateTime - it would be one row for each possibility for each group.
Two options occur to me for the syntax for aggregates:
1/ They look just like function calls:
SELECT my:aggregate(arg1, arg2, ...) { ... } GROUP BY ?x
The catch is that the prohibition about aggregates not in the pattern filters can't determined merely by parsing. The parser needs to know if a call is a function or an aggregate at parse time.
SELECT my:function(arg1, arg2, ...) { ... } GROUP BY ?x
The good news is that URI's only name one thing so it should not be a filter function and an aggregate.
2/ They are syntactically distinguished from functions by, for example, a keyword AGG(...)
SELECT AGG(my:aggregate,arg1, arg2,...) { ... } GROUP BY ?x
Or just AGG my:aggregate(arg1, arg2, ....)
Not as nice looking (??) but aggregates are easily distinguished without needing to look up, or otherwise know, the definitions of the IRI. An aggregate call is a built-in name COUNT etc or AGG(...)
Andy
[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2009JulSep/0237.html
Received on Monday, 31 August 2009 17:59:51 UTC