- From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
- Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2011 10:24:08 +0100
- To: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
- CC: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On 03/06/11 09:51, Steve Harris wrote: > While the answer is correct, I don't think this fully answers his > query. Seems like what he's asking for is for unknown datatypes to be > treated as numeric types (unless there's more information). I know the second part does but the first part is about "more openness and flexibility to SPARQL's handling of typed literals." > To be blunt, this sounds plain crazy to me, e.g. "23"^^xsd:hexBinary< > "24"^^xsd:hexBinary and "23"^^xsd:hexBinary< "ff"^^xsd:hexBinary is > a trivial example of where it will cause user confusion. I agree the proposal of auto-numeric is the wrong one. "2011-06+01:00"^^xsd:gYearMonth is "confusing" as a number. Suggested changes of wording? Andy > > - Steve > > On 2011-06-03, at 09:38, Andy Seaborne wrote: > >> Holger is asking about operator extensibility: >> >> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2011Jun/0001.html >> >> >> which is already in SPARQL 1.0: >> >> http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-query/#operatorExtensibility >> >> Proposed response: >> >> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/CommentResponse:HK-3 >> >> Andy >> >> >
Received on Friday, 3 June 2011 09:24:40 UTC