Hi Pavel, Rob,
So it seems this is correct behaviour after all.
Perhaps I was too quick to assume something was wrong. I think for
anyone used to SQL then it just seems wrong, but is in fact correct.
Thanks for spotting this, Rob.
And thanks for raising awareness, Pavel.
All the best,
barry
On 24/09/12 18:34, Rob Vesse wrote:
I believe this is in fact the correct behavior and in line with the
specification, see
http://answers.semanticweb.com/questions/17410/semantics-of-sparql-aggregat
es for a recent discussion on this with an explanation from Andy Seaborne
of the working group as to why this is correct behavior
The specific example there was a query with MAX but the same argument
applies here (in fact his argument does include treatment of COUNT)
Rob
On 9/24/12 1:46 AM, "Barry Bishop" <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Pavel,
Yes, the issue does seem to be in Sesame. I have raised this issue:
http://www.openrdf.org/issues/browse/SES-1108
I expect it will be taken care of fairly soon.
Thanks for letting us know.
barry
Barry Bishop
OWLIM Product Manager
Ontotext AD
Tel: +43 650 2000 237
email: [email protected]
skype: bazbishop
www.ontotext.com
On 24/09/12 10:17, Pavel Mička wrote:
Hi,
I have found the issue, which is probably in sesame. When I execute
the query, but the knowledge base does not contain any axiom, it
returns only the value from the aggregation (0) as a result. Which is
quite unexpected, as it (in my humble opinion) should return no result
(empty result set). When the query is executed and data are present,
than it works as expected.
Pavel
Dne 24.9.2012 8:22, Barry Bishop napsal(a):
Hello Pavel,
Can you provide some more details, please?
Do you mean that you see the expected variable names when calling
TupleQueryResult.getBindingNames(), but that calls to
TupleQueryResult.next().getBindingNames() do not have the expected
variable names? Is this true for every BindingSet?
Best
barry
Barry Bishop
OWLIM Product Manager
Ontotext AD
Tel: +43 650 2000 237
email: [email protected]
skype: bazbishop
www.ontotext.com
On 12/09/12 10:47, Pavel Mička wrote:
Hi,
I am using OWLIM-Lite edition (5.2.5331, Sesame 2.6.8) and I am
querying the system using the following SPARQL query:
PREFIX owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#>
PREFIX rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#>
PREFIX rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#>
PREFIX odra:
<http://kbss.felk.cvut.cz/ontologies/2012/OdraOntology.owl/>
SELECT ?type (COUNT(DISTINCT ?instance) AS ?count) WHERE {
?instance odra:hasType ?type .
}
GROUP BY ?type
In BindingSet I expect 2 bindings (type, count), however the result
contains only count. But the TupleQueryResult contains (correctly)
both of them.
Am I missing something or is this a bug?
Thanks
Pavel Mička
_______________________________________________
Owlim-discussion mailing list
[email protected]
http://ontomail.semdata.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/owlim-discussion
_______________________________________________
Owlim-discussion mailing list
[email protected]
http://ontomail.semdata.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/owlim-discussion
_______________________________________________
Owlim-discussion mailing list
[email protected]
http://ontomail.semdata.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/owlim-discussion
