- From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
- Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 19:07:26 +0100
- To: W3C RDB2RDF <public-rdb2rdf-wg@w3.org>
Oops, wrong working group! This was meant to go to the RDF-WG list. Sorry for the noise. Feel free to respond off-list, I'm interested in opinions ;-) Best, Richard On 18 May 2011, at 18:29, Richard Cyganiak wrote: > The RDF 1.1 Literal Quiz > ------------------------ > > Let's pretend we live in the future and RDF 1.1 has just been published, including this working group's attempt to clean up string literals. > > Now here's a quiz with some RDF trivia questions. > > What are the answers that you'd like to see? Please keep them short -- along the lines of “Yes”, “No”, “Don't care”, “Don't prefer but ok”, “Oh yes please please please”, “WTF!?!?”, “Formal objection!” > > (I tried to phrase the questions in terms of user-visible behaviour and not spec-internal mechanisms. I hope we can get some non-controversial test cases out of this, and pinpoint where we disagree on desired behaviour. If you provide responses, then feel free to add additional questions.) > > > > Q1. Does this RDF graph (written in Turtle) have one triple? > > <a> <b> 1 . > <a> <b> "1"^^xsd:integer . > > Q2. Does this RDF graph (written in Turtle) have one triple? > > <a> <c> "foo" . > <a> <c> "foo"^^xsd:string . > > Q3. Is this be a valid Turtle file? > > <a> <b> "foo"^^rdf:PlainLiteral . > > Q4. Is a parser allowed to unify "foo" and "foo"^^xsd:string into a single form while parsing? > > Q5. Is this a valid N-Triples file? > > <a> <b> "foo" . > > Q6. Is this a valid N-Triples file? > > <a> <b> "foo"^^rdf:PlainLiteral . > > Q7. Is this a valid N-Triples file? > > <a> <b> "foo"@en . > > Q8. Is this a valid N-Triples file? > > <a> <b> "foo"^^xsd:string . > > Q9. Is this true in SPARQL? > > datatype("foo") == xsd:string > > Q10. Is this true in SPARQL? > > datatype("foo") == error > > Q11. Is this true in SPARQL? > > datatype("foo") == rdf:PlainLiteral > > Q12. Is this true in SPARQL? > > datatype("foo"@en) == xsd:string > > Q13. Is this true in SPARQL? > > datatype("foo"@en) == error > > Q14. Is this true in SPARQL? > > datatype("foo"@en) == rdf:PlainLiteral > > Q15. Is this true in SPARQL? > > datatype("foo"@en) == rdflang:en > > Q16. Does the literal in this RDF/XML fragment have a language tag? > > <rdf:Description rdf:about="a" xml:lang="en"> > <rdf:b>foo</rdf:b> > </rdf:Description> > > Q17. Does the literal in this RDF/XML fragment have a language tag? > > <rdf:Description rdf:about="a" xml:lang="en"> > <rdf:b rdf:datatype="&xsd;string">foo</rdf:b> > </rdf:Description> > > For each of the following pairs of statements, if the statement on the left is true, then is the statement on the right true as well in a system that supports datatype inference (specifically, {xsd:string}-Entailment)? > > Q18. { <a> <b> "foo" . } => { <a> <b> "foo"^^xsd:string . } > > Q19. { <a> <b> "foo"^^xsd:string . } => { <a> <b> "foo" . } > > Q20. { <a> <b> "foo" . } => { <a> <b> "foo"@en . } > > Q21. { <a> <b> "foo"@en . } => { <a> <b> "foo" . } > > Q22. { <a> <b> "foo"@en . } => { <a> <b> "foo"@en-GB . } > > Q23. { <a> <b> "foo"@en-GB . } => { <a> <b> "foo"@en . } > > Q24. { <a> <b> "foo"@fr . } => { <a> <b> "foo"@en . } > > >
Received on Wednesday, 18 May 2011 18:07:55 UTC