- From: Birte Glimm <birte.glimm@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
- Date: Thu, 13 May 2010 13:42:11 -0400
- To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Cc: Chimezie Ogbuji <ogbujic@ccf.org>, W3C SPARQL WG <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On 13 May 2010 03:11, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> wrote: > Wow, that was quick! It costed me half my sleep ;-) but I'll be offline from today evening (Canadian time) until Sunday late night and I wanted to get the comments in soon. [snip] >>> I would also add, after the reference to condition 2, a paranthesis saying "(because the blank node _:c3 is shared by the scoping graph and the solution)" >> >> I extended the explanation because it is not just the fact the _:c3 is >> shared by SG and the solutions. The problem is rather the sharing of >> bnodes in different solutions which introduced an unintended >> co-reference since the bnode occurs in two solutions but in the >> queried graph the solutions do not involve the same bnode. This is >> what condition 3 in the query spec wants to exclude. I hope the >> paragraph is clearer now. > > It is, except that you have two sentences starting with "Since BGP does not contain blank nodes,...". I guess the first of the two should be taken out. I rephrased that now. I'll work on some of the non-editorial comments before I do the next CVS commit, but latest this evening (canadian time) this change should be online. Thanks again for your very helpful comments, Birte
Received on Thursday, 13 May 2010 20:18:08 UTC