- From: Olaf Hartig <olaf.hartig@liu.se>
- Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2025 10:09:28 +0000
- To: "public-rdf-star-wg@w3.org" <public-rdf-star-wg@w3.org>, "james@dydra.com" <james@dydra.com>
On Thu, 2025-08-21 at 03:17 +0200, James Anderson wrote: > On 20. Aug 2025, at 22:30, Andy Seaborne <andy@apache.org> wrote: > > On 16/08/2025 15:45, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: > > > There was again discussion in the SPARQL EXISTS task force on different solutions to the SPARQL EXISTS problems. > > > The solutions amount to, roughly: > > > Simple LEFTJOIN, where no bindings from outside the EXISTS affect the pattern inside. > > > > SEMIJOIN? > > is it not the case that, where no variable from the solution is free in the exists pattern, that pattern reduces to a > boolean constant value which depends only on the state of the target graph? What do you mean with a variable being "free in the exists pattern"? I agree with Andy, it is a SEMIJOIN. @Peter, thanks for this great summary! I agree with your believe that ONCE versus OVERALL is relevant only for DEEP INJECTION. -Olaf > > > > > Values injection at the beginning of the pattern (SHALLOW INJECTION). > > > Values injection inside the pattern (DEEP INJECTION), with two variations > > > values projected out in sub-SELECTs are not affected (PROJECTION) and > > > values projected out in sub-SELECTs are affected. > > > > > > > > --- > james anderson | james@dydra.com | > https://dydra.com/ > > >
Received on Thursday, 21 August 2025 10:09:37 UTC