W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > October to December 2005

Re: not sure if we're done with: Example Errors (sections 8, 9, 10)

From: Seaborne, Andy <andy.seaborne@hp.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 13:18:16 +0000
Message-ID: <439D7898.7090700@hp.com>
To: "Eric Prud'hommeaux" <eric@w3.org>
CC: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>



Eric Prud'hommeaux wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 07:36:28AM -0500, Eric Prud'hommeaux wrote:
> 
>>On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 11:45:19AM +0000, Seaborne, Andy wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Dan Connolly wrote:
>>>
>>>>Andy, you wrote:
>>>>
>>>>"... There wil be a formal response to your email 
>>>>when all the comments have been acted on."
>>>>
>>>>and I'm not sure if anything relevant has happened since then.
>>>>Any clues?
>>>>
>>>
>>>All the edit changes (sec 8/9/10) are done from:
>>>
>>>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2005Sep/0011.html
>>>
>>>Eric - what's the status of the comments on sec 11?
>>
>>
>>The first example in 11.2.3.1 for sop:RDFterm-equal should have two results
>>in the query results section, with the inverse solution as well as the
>>listed, since name1=>Ms A. and name2=>Alice is just as valid a binding.
>>
>>fixed
>>  http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/rq23/#conformanceB
>>
>>The second example in 11.2.3.1 has a typo, the time in the data should be
>>19:00, not 19:01 like listed, to get the results expected.
>>
>>fixed
>>  http://unagi/2001/sw/DataAccess/rq23/#func-RDFterm-equal
>>
>>The first example in 11.2.3.2 has several problems, so it's best to
>>re-examine it.  Namely, the FILTER construct is missing a parenthesis (or
>>should have the outside one removed) and the example appears to be
>>projecting an undefined variable for no reason.
>>
>>fixed
>>  http://unagi/2001/sw/DataAccess/rq23/#func-isBound
>>
>>The second example in 11.2.3.2 should have foaf:givenName as the predicate,
>>not foaf:name.
>>
>>aha, tx
>>fixed
>>  http://unagi/2001/sw/DataAccess/rq23/#func-isBound
>>
>>The query under section 11 Testing Values should probably read "?date > ..."
>>and not "?date < ...".  Otherwise, the same result will be returned in both
>>examples, since neither of the dates in the data will test true, no matter
>>whether the casting works or not.
>>
>>fixed
>>  http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/rq23/#tests
>>
>>I note that when I ran the LC version, I got no results.
>>
>>The example in 11.2.3.6 should read "FILTER regex(?name...", not "FILTER
>>regex(name..."
>>
>>fixed
>>  http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/rq23/#funcex-regex
>>
>>This may actually present some issues in general, but example 11.2.3.8 has a
>>statement ""FILTER (lang(?name) = "ES" ) )"".  Technically, "ES" will parse
>>to a untyped literal and the LANG function returns a xsd:string, which will
>>by the constraints of the language result in a literal compare, which will
>>fail in all cases.  To be technically accurate, it should read ""FILTER
>>(lang(?name) = str("ES") ) )"".
> 
> 
> Yes, that was the product of excessively sprinkling xsd types where
> they weren't needed. I have updated this text to reflect my 
> implementation and several others (note the announcement and responses
> [ST]). The editor's draft now has a new type called "simple literal",
> defined as an RDF plain literal with no language tag. The operators
> STR and LANG return simple literals; the operators <, >, <=, >=,
> langMATCHES and REGEX have forms that take simple literals as
> arguments.
> 
> The examples in the spec reflected the actul implementations. They
> have not changed. The operator definitions should now be consistent
> with the examples (well, they *should* have been consistent before,
> but now I think they are).
> 
> 
> 
> Andy, does this complete the response to Example Errors? Let me know
> if you need anything else. 

Yes - I had done mine - you can reply as you've covered all the sec 11 ones.

(There was a Q about STR function and xsd:string cast constructor which was 
just a Q.)

	Andy

> 
> [ST] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2005OctDec/thread#msg304
Received on Monday, 12 December 2005 13:19:24 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:25 GMT