- From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
- Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 18:17:09 +0100
- To: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
- CC: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org
On 20/04/11 17:57, Axel Polleres wrote: > hmmmmmm, potential effects of RDF decisions on Update or Query at this stage worry me... is there a way we can get around such effects > easily without just ignoring the movements in the RDF WG? Rather hard to get round, IMO: """ Recommend that systems silently convert xs:string data to plain literals """ and a SPARQL engine isa system. So we need to consider it even if we find it can be argued for no effect. Ignoring is not really viable. I haven't looked at "RDF Entailment Regime" and "RDFS Entailment Regime". xsd:string/simple literal is xsd 1a/1b in "7.4 Datatype Entailment Rules" of http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-mt/. Don't think it's mentioned anywhere else. Doing it right might be modifying rq25.xml#BGPsparql but I really hope we don't have to. I haven't had space to think about it but it does need checking. Maybe converting in parsing and/or expression evaluation is enough. On the upside, it makes nice, but tricky-in-the-detail, optimization of filters/patterns with string work. Andy > Axel > > On 20 Apr 2011, at 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 >> >> >
Received on Wednesday, 20 April 2011 17:17:36 UTC