W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > July to September 2004

RE: BRQL and typed literals

From: <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 13:58:33 +0300
Message-ID: <A03E60B17132A84F9B4BB5EEDE57957B02A2E9C1@trebe006.europe.nokia.com>
To: <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>, <andy.seaborne@hp.com>, <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stickler Patrick (Nokia-TP-MSW/Tampere) 
> Sent: 27 July, 2004 13:49
> To: 'ext Seaborne, Andy'; public-rdf-dawg@w3.org
> Subject: RE: BRQL and typed literals
> 
> 
> 
> > 2. Simply adopt the standard N-Triples notation for typed literals
>    including support for qnames (e.g. "10"^^xsd:integer). If a given
>    query engine/service supports the datatype in question, fine, else
>    it issues an error.
> 

Or alternately (and I've covered this in detail before, but
thought to stress this point) the engine can opt to treat unknown
datatypes such that, if the typed literal in a query matches
exactly a typed literal in the knowledge base (both lexical form
and datatype URI) then it can deem them to be equal and a match, 
otherwise it can treat it as a non-match (even if in fact
they are equal values (e.g. "010"^^xsd:int and "10"^^xsd.int)
and even issue a warning that some "real" targets may not have
been found due to lack of support for the datatype in question.

Thus

   DESCRIBE ?x WHERE (?x ex:booga "xyz"^^foo:blargh)

would still be a useful query, even for query engines who have no
clue what the datatype foo:blargh is, because it can still find
all triples explicitly matching that typed literal.

Patrick
Received on Tuesday, 27 July 2004 06:59:11 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:20 GMT