- 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