- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 05 Feb 2005 23:11:00 -0600
- To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
- Cc: Jos De Roo <jos.deroo@agfa.com>, Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org>, www-archive@w3.org
On Sat, 2005-02-05 at 12:42 -0600, Pat Hayes wrote: > > >> Pat, I didn't mean to ban poison like :isBnode or :isBound > >>> just indeed keep it in bottle of inference engine (and > >>> express such syntactic operations using Python, Java,..) > >>> I have seen no motivating example that we should speak > >>> and listen to them in something else than sets of RDF triples > >> > >> Well, I can't point to any use examples, but it seems reasonable that > >> someone might want to apply a syntactic filter to their query answers > >> (like, I only want to see answers which have all URIrefs in them, > >> say) No? > > > >Well ok, but I'm not really motivated by that example :) > > It felt a bit pathetic as I was writing it, I have to say. > > >Anyhow, we do many such jobs to prepare and extract triples > >from almost everything (even books written in PDF recently) > >and also to consume them, to put them in SVG on pocket PC > >etc, but for such jobs we simply use XSLT (and of course > >Python, Java, ...) > > Hmm, point taken. Well, then maybe what SPARQL should do is to > explicitly allow XSLT constructions as part of query, to describe > syntactic filters (? Does that make sense? Im a little out of my > depth here.) We're taking an easier way out: we're standardizing an XML format for query results, which fits neatly into downstream XSLT. http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-rdf-sparql-XMLres-20041221/ As to motivating example, the one that convinced the WG was a substitute for unsaid... [[[ SteveH claimed that the simplest form of unsaid can be done with optionals; evaluation/elaboration of this claim revealed that a BOUND function/operator/keyword was also involved, ala isBound in section 11.2.2 SPARQL specific operations as of v1.171: select ?x where (?x rdf:type :Person) [(?x ex:phone ?phone)] AND !bound(?phone) ]]] -- http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/ftf4.html#item04 On Fri, 2005-02-04 at 10:59 -0600, Pat Hayes wrote: > Sigh, I havnt been keeping up with BOUND and these discussions, my > bad. No, not your fault... the BOUND idea was new to me at the Helsinki ftf. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Sunday, 6 February 2005 05:11:03 UTC