- From: Alexander Jerusalem <ajeru@vknn.org>
- Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 20:02:39 +0100
- To: "Seaborne, Andy" <Andy_Seaborne@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: "'www-rdf-interest@w3.org'" <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Thanks a lot for your reply! > > * Is there any way to specify ordering like with the SQL order by clause? > > * Am I right to assume that there is no support for aggregate functions? > >You are right - RDQL does not have the features to sort or process the >values returned from a query. In Jnea, they are streamed back in the order >found and this may vary. As RDF does not constrain the data, results can be >a mix of plain string, resources or datatyped literals. My problem with this is that if the database backend doesn't handle sorting, grouping and aggregating, I have to fetch the whole result set from the database process and then do it without access to indexes. That's a problem with large datasets. > >* Would it be possible to query for all resources that do not have a >certain property? > >Not really. RDF does not express negation and the triple patterns matched >on the graph also do not allow tests for the absence of something. I'm was asking because there's the complementOf property in OWL and I wonder how I can implement it without this kind of negation. > >* If I think of a TriplePatternClause in terms of SQL joins, does it > > have inner or outer join semantics? For example if I say: > > > > > > SELECT ?lastname, ?email > > WHERE > > (?r, <my:lastname>, ?lastname) , > > (?r, <my:email>, ?email) > >Both property values must exist - it is a graph pattern to match against the >RDF graph. So I guess I would need multiple graphs ORed together to get what I want. > > * Does RDQL mandate anything with respect to inference along > > subPropertyOf/subClassOf lines or is this considered an implementation >detail? > >The assumption is that inference happens in the triple interfgace to the >data being stored. It is not a feature of the query language. That sounds like a very elegant but hard to implement idea. Gives me something to think about :-) >RDQL just looks a bit like SQL - it isn't SQL. It is more about the >handling of the RDF than about handling after the values have been extracted >from the model. Maybe I'm just abusing these technologies when I think of RDF as a flexible database format, of OWL as a data modelling language and of RDQL as a data query language. RDQL seems to suggest an in memory/in process view. -Alexander
Received on Thursday, 15 May 2003 15:04:00 UTC