Re: The Problem of Correlation and Substitution in SPARQL

good afternoon;

> On 2018-01-19, at 16:02, Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Yes, I confused the two reports.
> 
> 
> The problems with SPARQL EXISTS have not been fixed.  They should be because
> every SPARQL implementation I know of diverges significantly from the standard
> and, more important, SPARQL implementations differ from each other.
> 
> 
> However, I do not know what can be done to move the effort to fix SPARQL
> EXISTS forward.  Most vendors of SPARQL implementations do not appear to be
> interested at all.
> 

it may well be that this characterisation misconstrues in more case than one.

as with any other aspect of the interpretation of the sparql language, there is a decided interest on our part to ensure correct interpretation of query expressions and a striving for interoperability with other implementations, as both advance the interests of a wide community of implementers and users.

on the other hand, one should not expect universal interest in an endeavour which ignored forty years of programming language research, narrowly mis-interpreted the existing recommendation for the benefit of an academic research programme and proposed resolutions which stand well apart from realistic mechanisms to be deployed in production.

best regards, from berlin,
---
james anderson | james@dydra.com | http://dydra.com

Received on Friday, 19 January 2018 15:15:04 UTC