Re: Plain literals and xsd:string

>> It affects query.  BGP matching is simple entailment.
>> The wording must change there surely?
> Perhaps...
>> 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.
> Right, true.
> I don't have a clear feeling on how we should/could/ought to proceed. Is a decision from another WG enough new information for us to reopen that discussion?

I am extremely hesitant to make any changes to SPARQL based on an 
unimplemented decision of a Working Group that will not likely not have 
even had proposed/drafted text by the time we are going to Last Call.

>> Existing databases + new software will see a change.

It's my opinion (both personally and as co-chair of this WG) that any 
change made by the new RDF WG will need to be a change that works in 
concert with SPARQL 1.1 as it exists today -- that is, software may need 
to change, but it will need to change because the new RDF documents 
specify new behavior that works in concert with SPARQL 1.1.

>> In my experience, it is OWL tools that will be affected as they like to use xsd:string in RDF for ontologies.
> I've seen xsd:string in a couple of other places too, but it's fairly uncommon.

Cambridge Semantics' tools produce and consume a great deal of 
xsd:string typed literals.


> - Steve

Received on Wednesday, 20 April 2011 17:59:59 UTC