- From: Lee Feigenbaum <lee@thefigtrees.net>
- Date: Mon, 17 May 2010 20:49:12 -0400
- To: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@talis.com>
- CC: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On 5/17/2010 6:11 PM, Andy Seaborne wrote: >> PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-5, ISSUE-6, ISSUE-7, and ISSUE-13 with no change, >> noting that SPARQL 1.1 will only allow SELECT subqueries within the >> query pattern. > > Agree to close on the understanding that "ASK queries in FILTERs" are > covered by EXIST/NOT EXISTS in FILTERs. Right, this was my intention/understanding as well. >> PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-8 with the consensus that subqueries share the >> same RDF dataset as their parent query, and that FROM and FROM NAMED >> clauses are not permitted in subqueries. > > Agreed with the understanding that active graph of the outer query is is > the initial active graph of the subquery. I'm (personally) fine with this -- let's discuss it briefly before resolving tomorrow. > >> PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-14 with the consensus that SPARQL 1.1 defines the >> following aggregates: COUNT, SUM, MIN, MAX, AVG, GROUP_CONCAT, and >> SAMPLE. > > Agreed. thanks! Lee > Andy >
Received on Tuesday, 18 May 2010 00:49:50 UTC