- From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
- Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2012 13:52:30 +0100
- To: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org
On 10/04/12 11:57, Polleres, Axel wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> First Lee thanks for collecting the opinions of the commenters.
> after reading through the thread, my personal impression of the main reason for disagreement is that the group consensus from last week and the commenters' view
> are orthogonal (but both valid) viewpoints of what is a "natural"
> semantics for PPs.
>
> Axel
>
>
Most of the conversation is centered on "*". It is important that we
consider user expectations of queries such as:
SELECT (sum(?cost) AS ?total)
{
:order :hasItem/:price ?cost
}
here, duplicates make sense because it works with aggregation.
It has been noted that such queries can be written out in long form, as
two triple patterns. But if the abbreviated form is counter-intuitive,
it will be a source of problems and cost (e.g. support, education) going
forward.
It is probably useful to think of "/" as a syntactic shorthand, like ";"
and "," in Turtle, than as a completely new path operator. This has
been borne out by user feedback - convenient representation of queries
is useful to application writers.
Andy
Received on Tuesday, 10 April 2012 12:53:07 UTC