Re: BIND - a question of detail

On Oct 21, 2010, at 4:49 PM, Andy Seaborne wrote:

> If BIND is "post-processing" on a BGP, then it would follow that two BINDS are both in the same BGP and FILTER can float across mnultiple adjacent BINDs.
> Another example:
> SELECT ?s ?p ?o ?z
> {
>  ?s ?p ?o .
>  BIND(?o+1 AS ?z1)
>  FILTER(?z2 = 3 )  ## use z2
>  BIND(?o+2 AS ?z2)
> }
> The first way, FILTER is unbound.
> The second, the FILTER test the second BINDs outcome.

I currently implement the first way and have a mild preference for it, but I think that's mostly from an implementor's perspective. I don't have a good sense of what "makes sense" for BIND.


Received on Thursday, 21 October 2010 21:02:37 UTC