On 09/25/2013 04:02 PM, Dave Reynolds wrote:
On 25/09/13 14:57, Sven R. Kunze wrote:
On 09/25/2013 03:53 PM, Dave Reynolds wrote:
Hi Damian,
On 25/09/13 14:16, Damian Steer wrote:
On 25/09/13 12:03, Stuart Williams wrote:
On 25/09/2013 11:26, Hugh Glaser wrote:
You'll get me using CONSTRUCT soon :-)
(By the way, Tim's actual CONSTRUCT WHERE query isn't allowed
because
of the FILTER).
Good catch... yes - I've been bitten by that kind of thing too...
that
not all that's admissible in a WHERE 'body', is admissible in a
CONSTRUCT 'body'.
As far as I'm aware it is -- Tim's original simply misplaced a curly
brace. The filter ought to be in the WHERE body.
CONSTRUCT is essentially SELECT with a tabular data -> rdf system
bolted
at the end of the pipeline.
I think the point people were making is that the syntactic shortform
"CONSTRUCT WHERE" with implicit template only applies when you have a
simple basic graph pattern [1].
If the WHERE clause is more complex, e.g. with a FILTER, then you need
an explicit construct template.
Dave
[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-query/#constructWhere
How did you come to that conclusion?
Based on the part of the specification given by link [1] above, which
says (my emphasis):
"A short form for the CONSTRUCT query form is provided for the case
where the template and the pattern are the same and the pattern is
just a basic graph pattern **(no FILTERs and no complex graph patterns
are allowed in the short form)**."
Dave
I see, Dave. However, my intention was to understand the reason behind
that decision. This quote is not a justification, just a description of
what's expected to work.
I can't see why restricting the set of where clauses is necessary.
--
Sven R. Kunze
Technische Universität Chemnitz
Department of Computer Science
Distributed and Self-organizing Systems Group
Straße der Nationen 62
D-09107 Chemnitz
Germany
E-Mail: sven.ku...@informatik.tu-chemnitz.de
WWW: http://vsr.informatik.tu-chemnitz.de/people/kunze
Phone: +49 371 531 33882
