Can I suggest to use '->' instead of dots - this will make it much less
probable to have in Property names, but still reasonable as syntax.
On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 6:02 AM, Markus Krötzsch <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I have a proposal for a simplification in #ask query syntax that I
Markus Krötzsch пишет:
> On Freitag, 6. Juni 2008, CNIT wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>>
>>> I have a proposal for a simplification in #ask query syntax that I would
>>> like to get some feedback on.
>>>
>>> If you currently ask for property chains, you need something like the
>>> following:
>>>
>
Sergey Chernyshev wrote:
> I'm thinking about different forms of RDF publishing that is being
> adopted by various data consumers and RDFa (and possible eRDF) seem to
> be quite interesting - Yahoo hopes to support it in SearchMonkey
> eventually and RDFa usecases at W3 even mention it in conne
Markus Krötzsch wrote:
> Directly storing the annotations implied by inverses is a possible approach,
> but it requires me to rethink some parts of the storage engine. Currently,
> the subject of a property and the source of this annotation is the same, so
> we can manage annotation by their subjec
On Freitag, 6. Juni 2008, CNIT wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> > I have a proposal for a simplification in #ask query syntax that I would
> > like to get some feedback on.
> >
> > If you currently ask for property chains, you need something like the
> > following:
> >
> > {{#ask: [[works at::[[located
> > in:
Markus Krötzsch пишет:
> On Freitag, 6. Juni 2008, S Page wrote:
>
>> CNIT wrote:
>>
>>> After upgrading to 1.12 I've found that problem with format=embedded
>>> and further results link didn't disappear (no wonder).
>>> So, I've looked through the code and found a simple fix. It seems that
Hi all,
> I have a proposal for a simplification in #ask query syntax that I would like
> to get some feedback on.
>
> If you currently ask for property chains, you need something like the
> following:
>
> {{#ask: [[works at::[[located in::[[population::>100]]}}
>
> to find someone workin
On Donnerstag, 5. Juni 2008, Sergey Chernyshev wrote:
> Hmm. This all sounds pretty bad from a community member perspective, I hope
> you guys will clarify all this because SMW+ is a smart move for Ontoprise's
> marketing team, but clearly gives wrong impression, especially if split is
> a possibil
Hi all,
I have a proposal for a simplification in #ask query syntax that I would like
to get some feedback on.
If you currently ask for property chains, you need something like the
following:
{{#ask: [[works at::[[located in::[[population::>100]]}}
to find someone working at an organi
On Freitag, 6. Juni 2008, S Page wrote:
> Markus Krötzsch wrote:
> > As we plan to release SMW 1.2 in the next weeks, it is time for me to
> > provide a preview of intended new features.
>
> Here are a few bugs with test cases and patches that seem to work when I
> test locally. You might consider
On Freitag, 6. Juni 2008, S Page wrote:
> CNIT wrote:
> > After upgrading to 1.12 I've found that problem with format=embedded
> > and further results link didn't disappear (no wonder).
> > So, I've looked through the code and found a simple fix. It seems that
> > searchlabel was applied not checki
On Donnerstag, 5. Juni 2008, Jon Lang wrote:
> I'm not familiar with Keith's solution; but here are my own thoughts
> on how this should work:
>
> In MW, there's a capability of looking up which pages link to the
> current page (i.e., backlinks). In SMW, the inclusion of inverse
> relationships wo
CNIT wrote:
> After upgrading to 1.12 I've found that problem with format=embedded
> and further results link didn't disappear (no wonder).
> So, I've looked through the code and found a simple fix. It seems that
> searchlabel was applied not checking it's empty value,
> which _should_ means that
13 matches
Mail list logo
