- From: Johan De Smedt <johan.de-smedt@tenforce.com>
- Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2010 12:26:41 +0200
- To: "'Paul Gearon'" <gearon@ieee.org>, "'Bob DuCharme'" <bob@snee.com>
- Cc: <semantic-web@w3.org>
Hi Paul, You are right that this is a possible approach. The consideration I have is that - correctly clustered properties in RDF are serialized by SPARQL select and ones in XSLT, they need to be serialized again - especially this splitting and re-combining takes up a lot of processing. Best, Kind Regards, Johan De Smedt > -----Original Message----- > From: gearon@gmail.com [mailto:gearon@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Paul > Gearon > Sent: 27 April, 2010 01:00 > To: Bob DuCharme > Cc: Johan De Smedt; semantic-web@w3.org > Subject: Re: Processing RDF in XML/XSLT workflows > > On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 5:14 PM, Bob DuCharme <bob@snee.com> wrote: > > Hi Johan, > > > >>SPARQL result xml is not a full solution because it is limited to ASK > and > >> SELECT queries. > > > > Can you give me some examples of a need to process RDF with XSLT > where the > > results of a SELECT query were inappropriate? > > I confess that I've been wondering the same myself. > > For any given RDF, a SPARQL result can contain all the information, or > any desired subset, often in a more convenient form. For instance, an > RDF document can have the subjects and predicates in any order, but a > SPARQL result can order everything to creating groupings that would > make subjects and predicates easier to deal with: > SELECT ?s ?p ?o FROM <graph:uri> WHERE { ?s ?p ?o } ORDER BY ?s ?p ?o > > Sure, the elements aren't nested, but everything is there, and it's > completely deterministic. > > Regards, > Paul
Received on Tuesday, 27 April 2010 10:34:25 UTC