I think the Stardog issue is just that Stardog does not currently support any of SPARQL 1.1
Rob On Mar 15, 2012, at 12:52 PM, Andy Seaborne wrote: > On 14/03/12 22:09, Svatopluk Šperka wrote: >> Thanks for a response ! >> >> What you are saying would mean that for rule [23] 'ORDER' 'BY' >> OrderCondition+ (http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-query/), SPARQL >> endpoint should accept "orderby" but for example dbpedia running on >> Virtuoso is not the case, so I guess that it is not the way the >> grammar is generally understood. > > Yes - ORDER BY could be ORDERBY > > or > > ORDER BY > > or > > ORDER # comments > BY > > >> Stardog uses Sesame's OpenRDF to >> check the queries and it does not accept "not exists". > > You mean "notexists" or it does not accept "not exists" (one space, lower > case)? Both are legal. Maybe stardog isn't using the latest Sesame parser; > or you may wish file a bug report for Sesame bu > >> Is there any reason why Jena generates "not exists" instead of "not >> exists" ? > > No strong reason - it uses the internal function name which happens to be > "notexists" as it's legal for the SPARQL syntax. I'll change it as there is > no reason to be that form. > > Andy > >> >> >> Svatopluk Šperka
