DELETE will delete exactly those triples that you specify there by means
of triple patterns.
On 15.08.2017 10:56, Sidra shah wrote:
> Hi Lorenz, I know him and I have read your discussions.
>
> DELETE will delete the class also, or just triples. Moreover, we need a
> sort of condition in query which says if a player (which earlier has
> score<10 and member of Player class) score exceeds 10, he will now be
> member of StarPlayer and thus we need DELETE query to delete the earlier
> class.
>
> And DELETE what? The class to be deleted will be identified dynamic i-e if
> score>10, delete Player class if exist already.
>
> This is why jena rules, I think, provide more power in this scenario. Will
> Construct query works here?
>
> Construct {?x rdf:type :StarPlayer} Where {?x rdf:type:Player. ?x :Score
> ?score. (here I am not sure how score value can be compared using sparql)
>
> Regards
>
> On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 11:22 AM, Lorenz Buehmann <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> We had the same discussion here with Javed Khan [1] - this might be
>> somebody you already know as you're doing both almost the same
>> project...do you know each other?
>>
>> Anyways, I'll cite myself:
>>
>>> SPARQL 1.1 Update is straightforward ...
>>>
>>> General structure for making update queries aka. delete + insert:
>>>
>>>
>>> DELETE {
>>>
>>> }
>>>
>>> INSERT {
>>>
>>> }
>>>
>>> WHERE {
>>>
>>> }
>>
>> [1]
>> https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/jena-users/
>> 201707.mbox/%3CCAJhui%2BtTHYsz4qtYjpsVBmZp0p%3DpjOjvtR5_DcF4O7MQWC5RyQ%
>> 40mail.gmail.com%3E
>>
>>
>> On 15.08.2017 00:08, Sidra shah wrote:
>>> Hi Dave,
>>>
>>> "Your example just shows deducing an extra type, there's nothing to
>>> replace."
>>>
>>> I think there is a need to replace existing data. For instance, if a
>>> player score is less than 10, he is from the Player class. When the score
>>> becomes greater than 10, he becomes the instance of StarPlayer while the
>>> old value also exists i-e remains the instance of Player class.
>>>
>>> I am not sure if same problem will arise also when we use INSERT query
>>> rather than jena rules.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 11:39 PM, Dave Reynolds <
>> [email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 14/08/17 21:31, Sidra shah wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Dave, I know its not the complete syntax of jena rule but I just
>>>>> included it for understanding.
>>>>>
>>>>> Would you mind if you could just briefly explain how update query can
>> be
>>>>> used here in the situation above. Frankly speaking, I dont like jena
>> rules
>>>>> (as it does not replace existing data with new one)
>>>>>
>>>> Well you can write rules which drop existing values but it's true that
>>>> rules are normally used to add new values (new entailments). Your
>> example
>>>> just shows deducing an extra type, there's nothing to replace.
>>>>
>>>> and want if it could be
>>>>> replaced with SPARQL queries.
>>>>>
>>>> I've already said you can. Lookup the syntax for the Sparql update
>>>> INSERT...WHERE command and use that. If you need to also delete triples
>>>> then use the general DELETE...INSERT...WHERE form.
>>>>
>>>> Dave
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 11:20 PM, Dave Reynolds <
>> [email protected]
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 14/08/17 19:05, Sidra shah wrote:
>>>>>> Can we perform jena rules duties from SPARQL?
>>>>>>> (?x rdf:type :Player) (?x :Score ?score) greaterthan (?score "10") -?
>>>>>>> (?x
>>>>>>> rdf:type :StarPlayer)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Construct {?x rdf:type :StarPlayer}
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Where { ?x rdf:type :Player. ?x :Score ?score. > ?score 10)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's not the exact syntax for either Jena rules or sparql but yes,
>> for
>>>>>> a
>>>>>> single rule you can implement the same thing as a Sparql update.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For an entire rule set you many need to iteratively apply the updates
>>>>>> until nothing more changes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dave
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
