W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-shapes@w3.org > February 2017

behavior of SPARQL-based constraint components using EXISTS

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2017 13:33:56 -0800
To: "public-rdf-shapes@w3.org" <public-rdf-shapes@w3.org>
Message-ID: <2c1ee534-bb2c-0328-5b85-d4ed79df9ebb@gmail.com>

What is the behaviour of SPARQL-based constraint components that use EXISTS?

Is it the broken definition of EXISTS from the SPARQL document?  Is it some
particular fixed version of EXISTS?  Is it undefined?  Or is EXISTS not to be
used in SPARQL-based constraint components?

Peter F. Patel-Schneider
Nuance Communications

Received on Tuesday, 7 February 2017 23:12:02 UTC

This message: [ Message body ]
Next message: Peter F. Patel-Schneider: "Re: Union operations on graphs"
Previous message: Olivier Corby: "Re: SHACL draft ready for review"
Next in thread: Holger Knublauch: "Re: behavior of SPARQL-based constraint components using EXISTS"
Reply: Holger Knublauch: "Re: behavior of SPARQL-based constraint components using EXISTS"
Reply: Holger Knublauch: "Re: behavior of SPARQL-based constraint components using EXISTS"

Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]
Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]
Help: [ How to use the archives ] [ Search in the archives ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:02:48 UTC