- From: Seaborne, Andy <Andy_Seaborne@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2002 17:08:10 +0100
- To: "'RDF Rules'" <www-rdf-rules@w3.org>
Graham, Personally, I don't like the idea of flattening the list in the query results as the normal mode of operation - sometimes I do want the list as a list, they aren't just a way of encoding a bag for multiple properties, sometimes things like the order in the list matters or even the fact it is a list at all. I hoped the query system understood lists and treated them so as to return a thing explicitly marked as list, not a plain resource - that is just a convenience. My approach for your example would be to write an application wrapper around the query results that did the flattening to make it look like multiple properties if the application so desired. I see it as an application modelling decision. > Is that a request to submit an example? Yes! Andy -----Original Message----- From: Graham Klyne [mailto:GK@NineByNine.org] Sent: 16 September 2002 16:35 To: Seaborne, Andy Cc: Barnell, Alex; 'RDF Rules' Subject: RE: Query use cases At 12:57 PM 9/11/02 +0100, Seaborne, Andy wrote: >That's an interesting example (daml:collection) - presumably it suggests the >query should return only the list head and start part way down (unlikely the >query would do this match but possible). I didn't notice anything DQL about >this - maybe I missed it. My take was that the query would return the contents of the list, not the list itself; e.g. Thus a query against: head first item1 ; rest [ first item2 ; rest [ first item3 ; rest nil ] ] . might return matches against: item1 item2 item3 >The same is true of RDF alt/seq/bag - in many application situations it >would be nicest to mask the RDF encoding of the compound structure and >return a Quite! I thought that an implied rdf:member property might be used, so a QBE might be: head rdf:member ?x . to return item1, item2, item3 in the above example, or in: rdf:Seq rdf:_1 item1 . rdf:Seq rdf:_2 item2 . rdf:Seq rdf:_3 item3 . >Alex Barnell has been doing some work here on "RDFObjects" which provides >applications with a view of the RDF data as structured data items (e.g. >action items for working groups, vCards or iCal entries). > >Is this way of thinking about it - as higher level data abstractions - what >is going on, do you think? Hmmm.... I'm not sure, but maybe yes. In the sense that I want to treat a collection as an abstraction and query over it without being aware of its detailed encoding in RDF. By the way, the actual use case here is for document issue tracking, with issue history represented as a daml:collection style of list. I want to form a simple query that will return successive elements of the list in the same way that I can currently query a repeated property value (but in the collection case, the order in which bindings are returned matches the collection order). >Would submit an example at >http://rdfstore.sourceforge.net/2002/06/24/rdf-query/, run by Alberto >Reggiori, which is a collection of query examples even if it's a use case >with no solution. Is that a request to submit an example? #g ------------------- Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org>
Received on Monday, 16 September 2002 12:08:25 UTC