- From: james anderson <james@dydra.com>
- Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2017 16:08:58 +0000
- To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
- Cc: public-sparql-exists@w3.org
good evening; > On 2017-04-02, at 14:40, Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 04/02/2017 05:31 AM, james anderson wrote: >> good afternoon; >>> […] >>> >>> Do you think that there is not even consensus on the "problematic >>> situations”? >> >> correct. >> i have maintained, from the start, that some of the purported issues follow from a misconception and are not entailed by the recommendation. >> >>> I changed the abstract so that it does not say that there is >>> consensus on the solution. >>> >>> Here is what I am seeing for the abstract. >>> >>> >>> >>> Abstract >>> >>> A number of issues with the SPARQL EXISTS feature have been identified. This >>> document records community consensus within the SPARQL Maintenance (EXISTS) >>> Community Group on problematic situations with respect to SPARQL EXISTS and >>> contains two proposals for improvement, one that emphasizes maintaining some >>> form of compatibility and one that emphasizes producing a simple solution that >>> fits well into the rest of SPARQL. >> >> that restatement better articulates an incremental process. >> it does not change the view that some of the recorded issues are chimeric. >> i continue to maintain, the only true issue is #1. >> >> best regards, from berlin, > > Somehow I was unaware that you did not agree that the examples that I put > forward are problematic. i have been presenting that position for months. it is unfortunate, that i did not present it adequately, that it was understood. > > So you do not agree, for example, that that it is problematic that according > to the SPARQL specification that the running the query > > SELECT ?x WHERE { > ?x :p :d . > FILTER EXISTS { ?x :q :b . } } > > against the graph > > _:c :p :d . > :e :q :b . > > produces a result set containing a query solution that maps ?x to _:c? > > peter it would be problematic were the recommendation to require an implementation to produce that result. the recommendation does not require that. i do understand that various interpretations of the recommendation lead one to believe that it implies that result. those interpretations are flawed. best regards, from berlin, --- james anderson | james@dydra.com | http://dydra.com
Received on Sunday, 2 April 2017 16:09:34 UTC