On Tue, 25 Apr 2017 12:37:42 +0200, Rob Vesse <[email protected]> wrote:
Actually, no I am not fundamentally satisfied. I was trying to explain
how the current situation came to be in reply to your assertion that
“some idiocy” was responsible and in the context of your specific
complaint about to text indexing.
In general property functions as they exist in a variety of
implementations all try to address a limitation of the language in that
we have limited ways to introduce new solutions into a query:
1 - Pattern matches
2 - BIND()/Project Expressions
3 - Aggregation
4 - Values
2 is limited in that you can only introduce additional columns to
pre-existing solutions introduced by the other forms, 3 is limited in
that it reduces data. 4 only permits static data
What I would like to see in the language is a generalised mechanism to
allow inserting extensions that expand the possible solutions e.g.
SELECT *
WHERE
{
?s a <http://example> .
INVOKE <http://text-indexing>(?s, “arg1”, “arg2”) RETURNS (?o)
?s ?p ?o
}
However, no such extension exists currently to my knowledge nor do I
have the free time to investigate the potential ways to implement such a
solution. If no such extensions come into existence then there is very
little chance that they would make their way into future standards. So I
can complain about this all I want but it won’t change anything.
On the other hand, text indexing which is by now a widely supported
extension will likely be a prime candidate for future standardisation
There are other limitations in the language that have been discussed on
these lists in the past e.g. Supporting custom aggregations. Why doesn’t
the language supports standard deviation as a standard aggregate?
Ultimately a working group has limited time and limited scope, not
everything that everybody wants present in the language Will make it
into the standard. That is why we have vendor specific extensions
despite all the other interoperability problems that those create for
myself and other users.
I would reiterate the point I often make when people ask why X cannot
achieve Y:
A tool is designed for a specific set of jobs, it is not designed to
solve every possible problem! Don’t forget that you are a programmer
and that you have a general-purpose programming language at your
disposal. You can use this to achieve Solutions to many more problems
than your tool alone provides for.
Rob
On 24/04/2017 12:30, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
Where SPARQL is now relating to text-indexing, this is
'fundamentally' not
acceptable for me. And you seem to be 'fundamentally' satisfied...
--
Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
