- From: Jacek Kopecky <jacek.kopecky@deri.org>
- Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 16:04:06 +0200
- To: Keith Alexander <k.j.w.alexander@gmail.com>
- Cc: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>, al@jku.at, semantic-web@w3.org
Oh, and as for extending CONSTRUCTXML towards e.g. JSON, I guess one
could take a similar approach as XSLT with text output. Shouldn't be
much of a problem.
Jacek
On Wed, 2007-07-04 at 14:52 +0100, Keith Alexander wrote:
> On Wed, 04 Jul 2007 13:18:02 +0100, Jacek Kopecky <jacek.kopecky@deri.org>
> wrote:
>
>
> > myself I was thinking about something like this in a SPARQL extension,
> > which might be easier to standardize than FSL:
> >
> > CONSTRUCTXML
> > <catalogue>
> > <product id="{?prodid}">
> > {CONSTRUCTXML
> > <part name="{?partname}"/>
> > WHERE { ?prodid hasPart ?partName }
> > }
> > </product>
> > </catalogue>
> > WHERE { ?prodid rdf:type Product }
> >
> > You see that it has to be recursive and that variable bindings have to
> > be passed into the recursion, but that's about all the complexity in
> > this extension.
> >
> >
>
> That looks like it could be pretty handy, kind of like XQuery ? - I wonder
> if you could have a slightly different syntax to allow templating into a
> broader range of formats than XML (eg: JSON)?
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 4 July 2007 14:04:11 UTC