- From: Polleres, Axel <axel.polleres@siemens.com>
- Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 11:04:48 +0100
- To: "public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org" <public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org>
Final acknowledgement of comment JS-1 (forwarded with permission) Best, Axel -----Original Message----- From: John Snelson [mailto:john.snelson@marklogic.com] Sent: Montag, 14. Jänner 2013 10:35 To: Polleres, Axel Subject: Re: ORDER BY and literals The fact that there are no "simple literals" in RDF 1.1 seems like an adequate explanation. Thank you for your time. John On 10/01/13 15:10, Polleres, Axel wrote: > Hi John, > > I just see that the final reply to your comment might not have not reached you: > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2012Nov/0 > 006.html > > Sorry for the inconvenience, but could you please indicate in a short > response to public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org whether this addresses your comment? > The group is about to close down and we would like to see all comments closed. > > Thanks a lot, > Axel, on behalf of the SPARQL WG. > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Andy Seaborne [mailto:andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com] >> Sent: Donnerstag, 22. November 2012 23:15 >> To: public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org >> Subject: Re: ORDER BY and literals >> >> >> On 21/11/12 19:38, John Snelson wrote: >>> We all know that the datatype() function has been changed in SPARQL >>> 1.1 to reflect the expected reality of RDF 1.1 typing. >> >> Clarification: >> >> This aspect of datatype() has not changed in SPARQL 1.1. >> >> http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-query/#func-datatype >> >> Only the datatype of literals-with-language tag has changed (which >> was an error in SPARQL 1.0 and replacing errors by results is an >> extension route for SPARQL expressions). >> >>> to reflect the expected reality of RDF 1.1 typing. >>> ... I would prefer ORDER BY to be updated to sort plain literals in >>> the same way as xsd:string literals. >> >> Plain literals covers >> >> + simple literals >> (literals without datatype and without language tag >> it's SPARQL terminology as there was no RDF term for it. >> >> + literals with a language tag. >> >> There are no simple literals (strings with no language tag and no >> datatype) in RDF 1.1 parsed data. So the issue of sorting is >> simplified in RDF 1.1 - the case of two RDF terms having the same >> value (simple literal and >> xsd:string) does not arise. By giving an ordering to the same value >> but different terms items we get a consistent sort for such items. >> >> Plain literals with language tag will have SPARQL DATATYPE of >> rdf:langString where previously datatype() caused an error. >> >> The rule for plain literals does at least mean the ordering between >> literals- with-language lag and xsd:string is defined (they do not have the same value). >> >> Andy > -- John Snelson, Lead Engineer http://twitter.com/jpcs MarkLogic Corporation http://www.marklogic.com
Received on Monday, 14 January 2013 10:05:24 UTC