- From: <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>
- Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 13:58:33 +0300
- 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 UTC