- From: Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2006 21:48:13 +0200
- To: "Seaborne, Andy" <andy.seaborne@hp.com>
- Cc: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On Mon, Sep 25, 2006 at 11:22:10AM +0100, Seaborne, Andy wrote: > > We left open what to do about literals of the same value in DISTINCT > results. > > I propose that term-distinct apply to literals, and not a form of > value-distinct. +1, for all the resasons that you mention below, plus one can postprocess to get value-distinct. > SPARQL is defined for simple entailment anyway so for this entailment > regime it would be term-distinct for literals. I propose that rq24 only > talk about this. +1 as I am in favor o This will make it much easier to implement in simple SQL store, and > Some considerations: > > 1/ It's terms that are returned, not values, when encoded into the result > set. But which term should be returned if two literals are value-distinct > and not term-distinct? > > e.g. > > "1"^^xsd:integer > "01"^^xsd:integer > "1.0"^^xsd:decimal > > The SPARQL test suite is based on RDF graph equality [1] which uses term > equality for literals. > > > 2/ XPath/XQuery Functions&Operators [2] allows numeric type promotion - but > XML schema datatypes does not and double/float/decimal have different value > spaces. See [3]. > > "1.3"^^xsd:double != "1.3"^^decimal > > > I've checked in a test [4] for literal distinctness. > > Andy > > [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-concepts/#section-graph-equality > [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/xpath20/#promotion > [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/swbp-xsch-datatypes/ > [4] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/tests/data/Distinct/ > -- -eric home-office: +1.617.395.1213 (usually 900-2300 CET) +33.1.45.35.62.14 cell: +33.6.73.84.87.26 (eric@w3.org) Feel free to forward this message to any list for any purpose other than email address distribution.
Received on Monday, 25 September 2006 19:48:07 UTC