Skip to content

Definitions for Values Insertion #177

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

Draft
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Draft

Definitions for Values Insertion #177

wants to merge 3 commits into from

Conversation

afs
Copy link
Contributor

@afs afs commented Jan 8, 2025

A replacement for substitute.

The context is taken from SEP-0007.

Currently, all new material is in a single section.

I am submitting this PR to put the content under the WG agreement for IP and Licensing.


Preview | Diff

@afs afs changed the title Defintions for Values Insertion Definitions for Values Insertion Jan 8, 2025
@afs afs force-pushed the values-insertion branch from 3f606dd to f837588 Compare January 8, 2025 10:58
@afs afs self-assigned this Jan 23, 2025
@afs afs force-pushed the values-insertion branch from f3902e7 to 7e6e82a Compare April 4, 2025 14:06
@afs afs force-pushed the values-insertion branch 2 times, most recently from 0818131 to 95b4b0a Compare April 30, 2025 19:01
@afs afs mentioned this pull request May 3, 2025
@afs afs force-pushed the values-insertion branch 4 times, most recently from a0ccbd5 to f852c60 Compare May 18, 2025 19:42
@pfps
Copy link
Contributor

pfps commented May 19, 2025

In my view "values insertion" is the correct phrase to use.

@pfps
Copy link
Contributor

pfps commented May 23, 2025

I note that this PR is for deep values insertion where values are insterted into subqueries.

@afs
Copy link
Contributor Author

afs commented May 30, 2025

I note that this PR is for deep values insertion where values are insterted into subqueries.

Only variables are "in-scope" are affected.
The renaming apart means that variables hidden by scope in subqueries are not correlated. This is a point where correlation and the requirements of parameterisation might differ.

This query has a sub-query that exposes ?o

SELECT * {
    ?s :p ?o .
    FILTER EXISTS{ SELECT ?o { :s :q ?o }}

whereas the inner ?o in

SELECT * {
    ?s :p ?o .
    FILTER EXISTS{ SELECT ?s { ?s :q :?o }}

is not correlated.

As algebra expressions:

SELECT * {
    ?s :p ?o .
    FILTER EXISTS { SELECT * { ?s :q ?z} }
SELECT * {
    ?s :p ?o .
    FILTER EXISTS { ?s :q :?z }

are the same.

@afs afs force-pushed the values-insertion branch 2 times, most recently from a2db77b to 28b47ef Compare June 24, 2025 14:41
@afs afs force-pushed the values-insertion branch from 28b47ef to 1ac39b7 Compare August 4, 2025 14:33
@afs afs force-pushed the values-insertion branch from 1ac39b7 to bc4c6a0 Compare August 6, 2025 14:34
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants