On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 5:08 PM, Rob Vesse <[email protected]> wrote:
> I've noticed what may be a regression in MINUS behavior but may be wrong.  
> Long ago one of our developers wrote the following query as a test case:
>
>
> SELECT *
>
> WHERE {
>
>   ?n0 ?n1 ?n2 .
>
>   MINUS { <http://www.cray.com/n0-2> <http://www.cray.com/n1-2> 
> <http://www.cray.com/n2-2> .}
>
> }
>
>
> I.e. They are minusing a concrete triple pattern from some variables, prior 
> to ARQ 2.9.2 this worked but from 2.9.2 onwards it doesn't (likely because of 
> Paul Gearon's changes)
>

I'm not clear on what you mean by "worked".  What do you expect the
results to be?

>
> Now I'm not sure if this should ever have worked since the spec says that a 
> MINUS with no shared variables has no effect.  I only discovered the query 
> (which was buried away in some Spring context – oh joy!) because bumping the 
> ARQ version to the 2.9.3-SNAPSHOT to pick up some of mine and Andy's recent 
> SPARQL TSV improvements caused this test to start failing.
>
>
> What is the expected behavior in this case?
>

The working draft seems to address this directly [1], you should get
back all the triples in the default graph (as the MINUS evaluates to
no bindings and thus no solutions are eliminated from the LHS).

>
> If this is a regression can someone open a bug and take a look at fixing 
> this, if this isn't a bug and the new ARQ behavior is actually now correct 
> let me know as a query like this should be added to the DAWG test suite so 
> I'll send a formal comment (unless Paul/Andy just want to propose this at the 
> next WG telecom themselves?)
>
>

I tested the example in the working draft against both Fuseki 0.2.3
(ARQ 2.9.2) and against Fuseki 0.2.4-SNAPSHOT (ARQ 2.9.3-SNAPSHOT) [2]
and got the results indicated in the spec.

-Stephen

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-query/#neg-example-2
[2] 
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/snapshots/org/apache/jena/jena-fuseki/0.2.4-SNAPSHOT/jena-fuseki-0.2.4-20120703.101036-6-distribution.zip

Reply via email to