Re: ACTION summary

Just to follow up quickly, I had exchanged some mails with the chileneans on the issue and they also seemed to favor 
CONSTRUCT subqueries for some use cases... I wanted to  try to reformulate these with subselects to see how/whether it is more complicated to write them one or the other way. I was hoping to complete this over christmas, when I find some quiet hour... 

for the moment, merry christmas, all together,

Axel
 
On 23 Dec 2009, at 18:43, Lee Feigenbaum wrote:

> Andy Seaborne wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 22/12/2009 11:59, Axel Polleres wrote:
> >>> Has this ever been advocated or is it just speculation?
> >>
> >> What we have in the notes to this action is the following:
> >>
> >> "2009-11-02 23:14:05: [SteveH_]: this should probably do the same
> >> thing as CONSTRUCT, i.e. mint new bnodes for each solution"
> >
> > Err, in context we have:
> > ----------
> > ACTION: Axel to followup with Chilleans re: not including sub-constructs
> > in FROM clauses ←
> >
> > Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-133 - Followup with Chilleans re: not
> > including sub-constructs in FROM clauses [on Axel Polleres - due
> > 2009-11-09]. ←
> >
> > 22:56:56 <LeeF> discussion that Axel seems to be the main - perhaps sole
> > - proponent of sub-constructs in FROM clauses in the WG
> >
> > discussion that Axel seems to be the main - perhaps sole - proponent of
> > sub-constructs in FROM clauses in the WG ←
> >
> > 23:03:41 <AxelPolleres> Lee: Would " SELECT ( _:b1 AS ?blank) ... "
> > solve Axel's use case?
> >
> > Lee Feigenbaum: Would " SELECT ( _:b1 AS ?blank) ... " solve Axel's use
> > case? [ Scribe Assist by Axel Polleres ]
> > ----------
> >
> >> I was thinking of converting it into an issue in the light of that we
> >> haven't got any other mechanism to mint
> >> bnodes in subselects so far.
> >
> > Sure - but do I take it you are advocating this ability?  No point
> > raising issues about things no one is advocating.  The issue is not
> > SELECT (_:b ...) but the underlying need?
> 
> This got briefly mentioned at the TC, but yes, if I understand correctly
> Axel has at least one FOAF-related use case (the details of which escape
> me at the moment) that relies on minting new blank nodes.
> 
> > I thought that would be done as part of TF-LIB as we have discussed
> > generators for RDF terms before :  BNODE(), URI() and LITERAL().  Inline
> > syntax _:b1 is the worst of all worlds because it has different meaning
> > in different places.
> 
> I think that's a very reasonable approach, personally.
> 
> Lee
> 
> >
> >     Andy
> >
> >>
> >> Axel
> >
> >
>

Received on Thursday, 24 December 2009 17:32:35 UTC