On 23/06/14 14:37, Andy Seaborne wrote:
On 20/06/14 16:04, Miguel Bento Alves wrote:
https://github.com/mbentoalves/jena
Looking at the POM for jena-core, it still says ARQ 2.8.8.
Is the github repo uptodate?
What does maven dependency:tree say?
Something looks suspicious: ARQ is a dependency twice.
<dependency>
<groupId>com.hp.hpl.jena</groupId>
<artifactId>arq</artifactId>
<version>2.8.8</version>
<type>zip</type>
..
</dependency>
<dependency>
<groupId>${project.groupId}</groupId>
<artifactId>jena-arq</artifactId>
<version>${project.version}</version>
</dependency>
Andy
With my last last update, a Sparql command in a rule can be parsed.
Examples
of valid rules with a Sparql command can be (look only to syntax, the
rule
doesn't have any meaning):
[rule1:
(\\\sparql Select ?c ?d
where {?c <eg:p> ?d} \\\sparql)
(?a <eg:p> ?b)
(?b <eg:p> ?c) -> (?a <eg:p> ?c)]
[rule1:
(?a <eg:p> ?c) <-
(\\\sparql Select ?c ?d
where {?c <eg:p> ?d} \\\sparql)
(?a <eg:p> ?b)
(?b <eg:p> ?c)]
A Sparql command is enclosure in a rule as:
(\\\SPARQL
PREFIX
SELECT ...
\\\SPARQL)
An "open door" was left if in future we want go deep in parsing,
overcoming corner cases, and simplify the declaration, like this:
[rule1:
(Select ?c ?d
where {?c <eg:p> ?d})
(?a <eg:p> ?b)
(?b <eg:p> ?c) -> (?a <eg:p> ?c)]
Next steps:
working on execution of a rule with a Sparql command. In my opinion,
it will
be better to start with a rule only with one Sparql command. Something
like:
[rule1:
(?a <eg:p2> ?c) <-
(\\\sparql Select ?c ?d
where {?c <eg:p> ?d} \\\sparql)
]
After this step, the main goals are fulfilled. However, is desired rules
that combines sparql commands with clauses, that is the next step.
Comments and reviews are welcome.
Miguel
