Hi Hugh,
I recently stumbled over this post by the TopBraid/SPIN guys. Maybe
this is appropiate for your usecase.
http://composing-the-semantic-web.blogspot.ch/2013/06/spin-vocabulary-for-column-metadata.html
Regards,
Jerven
On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 1:29 AM, Hugh Glaser h...@ecs.soton.ac.uk
On 25/09/2013 00:23, Tim Harsch wrote:
That idea seems very similar to the DELETE WHERE already in SPARQL 1.1, so
maybe to be consistent with that existing syntax it should be CONSTRUCT WHERE
Hmmm... something like:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/REC-sparql11-query-20130321/#constructWhere
You'll get me using CONSTRUCT soon :-)
(By the way, Tim's actual CONSTRUCT WHERE query isn't allowed because of the
FILTER).
In the end, I just wrote a little service to process the XML into turtle, so I
do want I want now.
The problem is that the only result format I can rely on an endpoint
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
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
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
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
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
The where clauses for CONSTRUCT are not restricted.
CONSTRUCT WHERE {} is a shorthand for CONSTRUCT {} WHERE {} and the first
of those two patterns is restricted. It has to be because the target graph
is created from that pattern by substitution, not any evaluation.
Barry
On Wed, Sep 25, 2013
On 25/09/13 15:10, Sven R. Kunze wrote:
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
On 09/25/2013 04:31 PM, Andy Seaborne wrote:
On 25/09/13 15:10, Sven R. Kunze wrote:
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,
DAWG did at one time work with result sets encoded in RDF for the
testing work.
As the WG progressed, it was clear that implementation of testing
was based on result set comparison, and an impl needed to grok the XML
results encoding anyway. Hence the need for the RDF form dwindled but
it's
1) I can see Hugh's frustration that the RDF system is incomplete
in a way. You tell everyone you have a model which can
be used for anything and then make something which doesn't use it.
What's wrong with this picture?
Standardising/using/adopting
On 9/21/13 7:29 PM, Hugh Glaser wrote:
(By the way, Kingsley, replying to this has caused me to notice that the rdfxml
does not rapper very nicely - sorry to report!
rapper: Error - URIfile:///home/hg/sparql.rdf:8 - property element 'solution'
has multiple object node elements, skipping.)
On 9/21/13 6:32 PM, Jerven Bolleman wrote:
If you want back result columns you use SELECT. If you want describe to the
concept of result columns in RDF then you are
on your own.
I believe he wants to get a description of a SPARQL query solution (or
result set). Basically, what you
Hi Hugh,
You can get results in RDF if you use CONSTRUCT -- which is basically
a special case of SELECT that returns 3-tuples and uses set semantics
(does not allow duplicates), but I imagine that you are aware of this.
Returning RDF for SELECT where the result set consists in n-tuples
where n
Many thanks, William, and for confirming so quickly.
(And especially thanks for not telling me that CONSTRUCT does what I want!)
I had suddenly got excited that RDF might actually be useable to represent
something I wanted to represent, just like we tell other people :-)
So it is all
On 9/21/13 2:38 PM, Hugh Glaser wrote:
Many thanks, William, and for confirming so quickly.
(And especially thanks for not telling me that CONSTRUCT does what I want!)
I had suddenly got excited that RDF might actually be useable to represent
something I wanted to represent, just like we tell
Hi Hugh,
I think you disregarded the CONSTRUCT queries a bit to quickly. This is what
you use when you want to get back triples.
If you want back result columns you use SELECT. If you want describe to the
concept of result columns in RDF then you are
on your own.
Maybe if you explain what you
Thanks Jerven, you may well be right!
SELECT DISTINCT * WHERE
{ ?s foo:bar ?o }
would do.
And things like
SELECT DISTINCT * WHERE
{ ?v1 foo:bar ?o . ?v1 ?p1 ?v2 . ?v2 ?p2 ?v3 }
and then probably get back an identifier for each result, so that I can find
out what are the values of the ?p* and ?v*
20 matches
Mail list logo
