- From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@topquadrant.com>
- Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 14:32:49 +0100
- To: public-sparql-exists@w3.org
On 12/07/16 23:08, james anderson wrote:
>
>> On 2016-07-12, at 23:28, Jeen Broekstra <jeen.broekstra@gmail.com
>> <mailto:jeen.broekstra@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> On 13/07/16 02:56, james anderson wrote:
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>> yes, i did an initial example in the wiki, just to show what one
>>> needs to be
>>> able to look at in one plac just in order to comprehdne an issue.
>>
>> To be honest, I have no idea what I'm looking at there - assuming
>> we're talking about the same wiki page:
>>
>> https://github.com/w3c/sparql-exists/wiki/Examples
>>
>> I see two SPARQL queries, the first followed by something which
>> vaguely looks like a template for a query solution ( a lot of "s",
>> "p" and "o" in various layers of bracketing) and then the sentence
>> "the dataset as turtle", the second followed by "the intended
>> solution as csv".
>>
>> Admittedly I haven't quite caught up with all the correspondence yet,
>> but none of this really clarifies what the issue is, to me.
>>
>> Or do I perhaps misunderstand and is this merely a *template* you
>> provided, that we collectively need to fill in with _actual_ examples?
>
> better, now you do understand.
> it is a mock up which draws from two of the patel-schneider cases.
>
>>
>> I'll be happy to assist with formatting if someone can provide some
>> raw data:
>>
>> 1. a (minimal) sample dataset
>> 2. a sample SPARQL query (we got those already)
>> 3. expected outcome of query execution on the sample dataset
>>
>> I realize point 3 is exactly where the issue/dispute/uncertainty is,
>> but picking _some_ example outcome gives us a good starting point,
>> both for implementors to try their engine and see how it compares,
>> and for us all to go back to the spec and see how we 'algebraically'
>> arrive at that outcome.
>
> exactly.
> the one purpose for that table is to get (at least) those three things
> in one place on one page.
> best would be if there were tooling which generated such a thing - in
> a much more compact form than the pages accompanying the current test
> suites, from the current test declarations.
>
> before embarking on a manual process, it would be good to
> a) know that no tooling exists
> b) agree on the layout.
A small point to avoid confusion: the CSV format for SPARQL results is
lossy. It uses only strings and numbers.
The TSV form does put Turtle RDF terms as the cell contents.
Andy
>
> best regards, from berlin,
> ---
> james anderson | james@dydra.com <mailto:james@dydra.com> |
> http://dydra.com
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 13 July 2016 13:33:22 UTC