W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org > February 2007

Re: Ambiguity for Literal order in SPARQL

From: Richard Newman <r.newman@reading.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 12:47:23 -0800
Message-Id: <70DAEC40-64DD-4AA6-B458-F002381CEC17@reading.ac.uk>
Cc: "Stephane Fellah" <stephanef@imagemattersllc.com>, <public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org>
To: Richard Newman <r.newman@reading.ac.uk>

While we're on the topic, can I suggest that the DAWG write up a list  
much like the following and add it to the SPARQL docs? It's a useful  
test case for implementations to follow, regardless of whether this  
is the actual sorted order.

On  21 Feb 2007, at 10:34 AM, Richard Newman wrote:

>
> A sorted order would look like this:
>
> "abc"                  < plain literal, sorted by lexical form
> "horse"                < plain literal, no language
> "horse"@en             < plain literal, "en" > nil
> "horse"@fr             < plain literal, "fr" > "en"
> "horse"^^xsd:string    < xsd:string wins out over plain literal's  
> implicit xsd:string
> "horse"^^xsd:xstring   < sorting by type URI: "xstring" > "string"
> "xyz"                  < lexical form wins out again.
Received on Wednesday, 21 February 2007 21:01:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:14:51 GMT