Re: AW: BIND in CONSTRUCT query with sub-SELECT (SPARQL)

2015-11-24 Thread Andy Seaborne
On 24/11/15 13:14, Wetz Peter wrote: Thanks Rob, this also does the job. What are advantages of this approach compared to using BIND() ? Performance? Thanks again and best, Peter Not much difference. They are the same operation with same rules as to what you can and can't do. They happen at

AW: BIND in CONSTRUCT query with sub-SELECT (SPARQL)

2015-11-24 Thread Wetz Peter
Thanks Rob, this also does the job. What are advantages of this approach compared to using BIND() ? Performance? Thanks again and best, Peter > -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- > Von: Rob Vesse [mailto:rve...@dotnetrdf.org] > Gesendet: Dienstag, 24. November 2015 12:02 > An: users@jena.apache.or

AW: BIND in CONSTRUCT query with sub-SELECT (SPARQL)

2015-11-24 Thread Wetz Peter
Maybe a valid answer, however in my use case that wouldnt work, because I want to bind a variable which is then used in the CONSTRUCT, but it's a new (!) variable and not a variable which comes from the nested SELECT. Best > -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- > Von: Martynas Jusevičius [mailto:m

AW: BIND in CONSTRUCT query with sub-SELECT (SPARQL)

2015-11-24 Thread Wetz Peter
To answer my own question, I think this is the correct solution: PREFIX CONSTRUCT { ... } WHERE { BIND () { SELECT ... WHERE { ... } GROUP BY ... } } Best, Peter > -Ursprüngliche Nachrich