- From: Gregory Williams <greg@evilfunhouse.com>
- Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2012 15:40:52 -0400
- To: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
- Cc: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org
On Apr 10, 2012, at 3:34 PM, Andy Seaborne wrote:
> ** http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/CommentResponse:AH-1
>
> Main point:
>
> I'd like more time on this. It seems an easy mistake to fall into and also one that might affect federated query.
>
> One possibility is to allow BINDINGS in a group (i.e. between {}) then it's still a join but the FILTER is over the matching+joined data.
I'm mostly happy with what we've got now, but I'd much prefer this (BINDINGS in a group) over any change that attempts to do in-place substitution of variables for values in the BINDINGS clause. My main concern is avoiding piling more work onto the list of things we need to do before heading to CR.
.greg
Received on Tuesday, 10 April 2012 19:41:19 UTC