Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

How to represent UNION? #4

Open
dgarijo opened this issue May 7, 2019 · 3 comments
Open

How to represent UNION? #4

dgarijo opened this issue May 7, 2019 · 3 comments
Assignees

Comments

@dgarijo
Copy link

dgarijo commented May 7, 2019

I don't see how one can represent Unions in a query. I tried to put it as part of the WHERE clause, but at least in the playground doesn't work

@pasqLisena
Copy link
Member

The UNION is indeed not supported in the current version.
Probably it is possible to support it in the $where field (investigating on it).

@dgarijo
Copy link
Author

dgarijo commented May 7, 2019

I tried it in the playground without success. I feel a little like rewriting the SPARQL query in JSON. Why not define a frame and a SPARQL query directly?

@pasqLisena
Copy link
Member

It depends on the query :) For more plain queries (like the ones in the examples), we think that a unique file is better. Of course, when queries become complicated, I would recommend to use plain SPARQL queries.

Your suggestion about decoupling frame and query is actually interesting.
I am thinking about if we should give to the user the 2 options:

  • separately have frame and query;
  • use the syntax we have so far.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants