- From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
- Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 12:11:28 +0100
- To: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org
Some good news:
http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/query-1.1/rq25.xml#func-concat
Because we decided CONCAT tends to produce simple literals, not
xsd:string on mixed simple/xsd:string combinations, we are
But should
concat("foo"^^xsd:string, "bar"^^xsd:string) ->
"foobar"^^xsd:string (current defn)
or
"foobar"
What about
BIND("foo"^^xsd:string AS ?x)
On 20/04/11 09:47, Andy Seaborne wrote:
>
>
> On 19/04/11 23:17, Steve Harris wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> The RDF WG intends to recommend that xsd:strings be silently
>> converted to RDF plain literals internally. See Resolution 1 in
>> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2011-04-13.
>>
>> This would have some impact on SPARQL deployments, as we go to some
>> lengths in a few places to preserve the differences. I'm not sure it
>> should necessarily affect the wording of any of the SPARQL texts, but
>> it's probably worth bearing in mind. It could be that we can simplify
>> some wording, but we should take care not to become dependent on a
>> new RDF rec. for publication.
>>
>> - Steve
>>
>
> What should update do?
>
> INSERT DATA { :s :p "foo"^^xsd:string }
>
>
> It affects query. BGP matching is simple entailment.
> The wording must change there surely?
>
> Either that or
>
> SELECT * { ?s ?p "foo"^^xsd:string }
>
> will stop matching on data now converted to "foo" without a software
> change to the query engine.
>
> Existing databases + new software will see a change.
>
> In my experience, it is OWL tools that will be affected as they like to
> use xsd:string in RDF for ontologies.
>
> Andy
Some good news:
http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/query-1.1/rq25.xml#func-concat
Because we decided CONCAT tends to produce simple literals, not
xsd:string on mixed simple/xsd:string combinations, we are
The RDF-WG resolution says:
"""
Recommend that systems silently convert xs:string data to plain literals.
"""
So should
concat("foo"^^xsd:string, "bar"^^xsd:string) ->
"foobar"^^xsd:string (current defn)
or
"foobar"
What about
BIND("foo"^^xsd:string AS ?x)
Less good news:
I hacked up a version of ARQ that parses xsd:strings to simple literals
in data and SPARQL queries and got test failures in the SPARQL 1.0 test
suite (as well as failures in ARQ's test suite).
The 3 failures are all data related, 2 in the DISTINCT tests and 1 in
the REDUCED tests.
Andy
Received on Wednesday, 20 April 2011 11:11:55 UTC