Re: CommentResponse:HK-3

On 2011-06-03, at 10:24, Andy Seaborne wrote:
> 
> 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?

Maybe add something like:

"The group feels that implicit casting of unknown datatypes to numerical types would be counter productive. The intended mechanism for datatype extension already exists in SPARQL 1.0..."

There's also the issue that he's using the datatyping mechanism to fudge units, which as I understand it isn't really correct, but that's a separate issue.

- 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
>>> 
>>> 
>> 

-- 
Steve Harris, CTO, Garlik Limited
1-3 Halford Road, Richmond, TW10 6AW, UK
+44 20 8439 8203  http://www.garlik.com/
Registered in England and Wales 535 7233 VAT # 849 0517 11
Registered office: Thames House, Portsmouth Road, Esher, Surrey, KT10 9AD

Received on Friday, 3 June 2011 10:03:17 UTC