W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org > July 2008

Re: SPARQL and string literal matching woes - spec inconclusive - try 2

From: Richard Newman <rnewman@franz.com>
Date: Sun, 6 Jul 2008 13:08:32 -0700
Cc: Nuutti Kotivuori <naked@iki.fi>, "public-sparql-dev@w3.org" <public-sparql-dev@w3.org>, "public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org" <public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org>
Message-Id: <AC5F1C23-C3F2-4686-85BD-D4960EDF2256@franz.com>
To: "Seaborne, Andy" <andy.seaborne@hp.com>

Andy,

Is this actually true? See the SPARQL Tests section of the table,  
which defines a match for two RDF terms. (Of course, they're not  
RDFterm-equal, so it produces a type error anyway.)

-R

On  6 Jul 2008, at 11:07 AM, Seaborne, Andy wrote:

> Not trickier - uses a different part of the spec :-)
>
> See sec 11 operator dispatch table.
> http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-query/#OperatorMapping
>
> Under (minimal) SPARQL,
>
> =   (value"^^xsd:string , "value" )
>
> has no entry in that table.  So it's a type error and the FILTER is  
> false.
Received on Sunday, 6 July 2008 20:09:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 6 July 2008 20:09:48 GMT