<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: SPARQL Versus Versa</title>
	<atom:link href="http://eric.van-der-vlist.com/blog/2005/04/21/568_sparql_versus_versa/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://eric.van-der-vlist.com/blog/2005/04/21/568_sparql_versus_versa/</link>
	<description>XML, apiculture et pré-vergers</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 04 Dec 2008 21:30:29 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: John Knottenbelt</title>
		<link>http://eric.van-der-vlist.com/blog/2005/04/21/568_sparql_versus_versa/#comment-19</link>
		<dc:creator>John Knottenbelt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://eric.van-der-vlist.com/blog/?p=28#comment-19</guid>
		<description>I agree - the lack of GROUP BY and aggregate functions such as SUM() and COUNT() is a real deal-breaker. If SPARQL can do these, it's certainly not obvious.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree - the lack of GROUP BY and aggregate functions such as SUM() and COUNT() is a real deal-breaker. If SPARQL can do these, it&#8217;s certainly not obvious.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
