  Re: ungrouped variables used in projections - Further
implications?  From: Andy Seaborne
<andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com> Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2010 14:48:36
+0100 Message-ID: <4C7670B4.6090602@epimorphics.com> To: Axel
Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org> CC: SPARQL Working Group
<public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>, Lee Feigenbaum <lee@thefigtrees.net>,
Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>  On 25/08/10 22:24, Axel
Polleres wrote: >>> Any opinions on this? This actually worries
me about the current  "potentially bound" wording. >> If we want
a static analysis of the query, then regard ?Y as potentially >>
bound. > We'd need to explain/define the exact reading of
"regard as potentially bound". As it stands it is unclear. My
example *could* be detected by static analysis, if the static
analyser was able to detect *statically* unsatisfiable FILTER
expressions, such as (?Y != ?Y) , so it is not clear why  ?Y
should be regarded as as potentially bound in my example. I am
fine with any formulation which has a clear definition, th