- From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
- Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2012 18:04:52 +0000
- To: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org
On 07/11/12 17:37, Gregory Williams wrote: > I was going to send a response to John Snelson regarding his new > comment about "ORDER BY and literals", but wanted to clarify on the > list first. > > My understanding is that he is confusing "RDF literals with type > xsd:string" with literals for which DATATYPE() returns xsd:string. > Admittedly this is a bit confusing with the new DATATYPE() > definition, but it's the awkward position we're in by basing SPARQL > on RDF 1.0 but wanting to be foreward looking w.r.t. RDF 1.1, right? Yes, spot on. This has not changed from SPARQL 1.0. The datatype of a simple literals is xsd:string (see RDFs rules D-entailment, XSD 1a and 1b). It was that or "error". Andy > > .greg > >
Received on Wednesday, 7 November 2012 18:05:21 UTC