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

[#295] Added support for the prefixes #298

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
Feb 1, 2025
Merged

[#295] Added support for the prefixes #298

merged 8 commits into from
Feb 1, 2025

Conversation

MSattrtand
Copy link
Collaborator

Resolves #295

@MSattrtand MSattrtand requested a review from blcham January 23, 2025 10:20
@blcham blcham force-pushed the 295-support-prefixes branch from cefc886 to 6c85b75 Compare January 23, 2025 11:38
Copy link
Contributor

@blcham blcham left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

see my comment, please make dependance on spin as small as possible.

Make following method:
QueryUtils.getQueryWithModelPrefixes(String query, Model model)

Make 2 tests of this method:

  • getQueryWithModelPrefixes includes all prefixes from the query
  • getQueryWithModelPrefixes includes all prefixes from the model

@MSattrtand MSattrtand requested a review from blcham January 24, 2025 09:57
@MSattrtand MSattrtand requested a review from blcham January 24, 2025 14:02
Copy link
Contributor

@blcham blcham left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Those tests are very long and hard to read ... We are reusing staff from different PRs which does not make sense to use in this PR , e.g why are we reusing this query:

            CONSTRUCT {
              ?airport__previous airports_from_query1:is-before-airport ?airport .
            } WHERE {
            
              #${VALUES}
            }

We have CONSTRUCT query with #${VALUES} -- this is confusing
This is also super confusing in this context ?airport__previous airports_from_query1:is-before-airport ?airport .

So why not having super easy CONSTRUCT query that makes sense, i don't know, e.g.

CONSTUCT {
 ?p a model-prefix:Person .
WHERE {
  ?p a query-prefix:Person .
}

@MSattrtand MSattrtand requested a review from blcham January 27, 2025 09:38
@blcham blcham force-pushed the 295-support-prefixes branch from e880bfa to 5c5a76e Compare January 30, 2025 16:55
@blcham
Copy link
Contributor

blcham commented Feb 1, 2025

@MSattrtand have a look at my last two commits:
image

Copy link
Contributor

@blcham blcham left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, see my comments above.

@blcham blcham merged commit b85a198 into main Feb 1, 2025
2 checks passed
@blcham blcham deleted the 295-support-prefixes branch February 1, 2025 13:40
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.

Support prefixes in apply-construct-with-chunked-values
2 participants