Hi Fabian, The two queries are indeed functionally equivalent so as far as I can tell this is a bug in OWLIM-Lite.
As a temporary workaround I can only advise you to use the working form (#2). I will file the issue and we'll address it as soon as possible. In the mean time can you possibly send the data (or the relevant part of it) that could help us reproduce it locally? Thanks! Cheers, Ivan On Thursday 22 December 2011 10:53:03 Fabian Cretton wrote: > Thank you > Fabian > > >>> Barry Bishop <[email protected]> 22.12.2011 09:42 >>> > > Hi Fabian, > > I'm not sure about this, so I'll pass it over to the developers. They > should get back to you with an answer shortly. > > Regards, > barry > > -- > Barry Bishop > OWLIM Product Manager > Ontotext AD > Tel: +43 650 2000 237 > email: [email protected] > On 19/12/11 14:56, Fabian Cretton wrote: > > Dear all, > > Is there a difference between the two following patterns: > ?ws1 wn20schema:inSynset ?syn1. > ?ws2 wn20schema:inSynset ?syn2. > ?syn1 wn20schema:hyponymOf+ ?syn2. > > compared to: > ?ws1 wn20schema:inSynset ?syn1. > ?ws2 wn20schema:inSynset ?syn2. > ?syn1 wn20schema:hyponymOf+ ?tst. > FILTER(?syn2 = ?tst) > > I use this in a larger queries, where the first form doesn't return the > results I would expect, but the second one does, is this normal ? (I could > post information about the data and the full query if needed). > > I am working with OWLIM-Lite 4.3 > > Thanks for any help > Fabian > _______________________________________________ > OWLIM-discussion mailing > [email protected]http://ontotext.com/mailman/listinfo/owli > m-discussion _______________________________________________ OWLIM-discussion mailing list [email protected] http://ontotext.com/mailman/listinfo/owlim-discussion
