- From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
- Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2011 09:34:57 +0000
- To: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
- CC: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>, SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On 14/02/11 09:17, Axel Polleres wrote: > Hi steve, > > On 8 Feb 2011, at 16:31, Steve Harris wrote: > ... > >> He raises a reasonable point about the interaction of ORDER BY, >> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/query-1.1/rq25.xml#convertSolMod >> could be construed as meaning that ORDER is preserved in aggregate >> operations, though the algebra does say it's operations on >> multisets. > > Is this something that needs to be discussed? Could an alternative > behaviour to the current one be achieved with reasonable effort and > the time/resources we still have? This relates to Jeen's point about GROUP_CONCAT and ORDER BY http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2011Feb/0004.html Maybe we should add "; ORDER BY" to GROUP_CONCAT. Andy
Received on Monday, 14 February 2011 09:35:35 UTC