- From: Gregory Williams <greg@evilfunhouse.com>
- Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 17:02:00 -0400
- To: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
- Cc: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
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.
.greg
Received on Thursday, 21 October 2010 21:02:37 UTC