regrets and last input for the call...

As I can't join the call, here some last input for word-smithing...

At a second read... what I just committed reads strange:

 >> Maybe (intro): """ ...typed rdf:text literals MUST NOT occur in
 >> published RDF content or in the results of SPARQL basic graph pattern
 >>  matching [SPARQL] using extended SPARQL Basic Graph Matching"""

I won't object against it, but how about rather:

"In order to prevent interoperability problems between RDF processors 
that support rdf:text and those that do not, typed rdf:text literals in 
published RDF content MUST NOT be generated by RDF processors, such as 
APIs, or SPARQL engines that implement SPARQL basic graph pattern 
matching [SPARQL] using extended SPARQL Basic Graph Matching;"


Would that go?

I think we simply can't reasonably forbid that anyone "publishes"
rdf:text literals... just as e.g. ill-typed xs:integer literals can't be 
forbidden. (and ill-typed literals already *do* occur on the Web... )

I.e., if I publish today

  :axel :likes "foo"^^xs:integer.

that is totally ok with RDF. It might not be wise, but well.
Likewise, I also can publish complete nonsense in terms of OWL and 
nobody can prevent that [1]

In that light... saying that publishing

  :axel :likes "bar"^^rdf:PlainLiteral.

is something that MUST NOT be done, I have the feeling that is 
overshooting Still, I think we can and should prevent systems to 
generate such thing. I would thus prefer the rewording suggested above.


Best regards,
Axel

1. http://axel.deri.ie/~axepol/nasty.rdf


xel Polleres wrote:
> Seaborne, Andy wrote:
>> Boris,
>>
>> The text talks about "in a SPARQL basic graph pattern" - that could be 
>> read as what goes in to matching (i.e. part of the PSARQL query 
>> syntax. It needs to refer to the results of matching a BGP (what comes 
>> out of matching).
>>
>> (I'm not worried about use of rdf:text in a BGP)
>>
>> Maybe (intro): """ ...typed rdf:text literals MUST NOT occur in 
>> published RDF content or in the results of SPARQL basic graph pattern
>>  matching [SPARQL] using extended SPARQL Basic Graph Matching"""
> 
>> *in the result of* is the key here.
> 
> 
> I implemented it:
> 
> * SPARQL reference added
> * your suggested text added.
> 
> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/index.php?title=InternationalizedStringSpec&diff=24147&oldid=24140 
> 
> 
> Is the document in that form acceptable?

At a second read... that is strange.
As I can't come tomorrow, here some last input for word-smithing...



-- 
Dr. Axel Polleres
Digital Enterprise Research Institute, National University of Ireland, 
Galway
email: axel.polleres@deri.org  url: http://www.polleres.net/

Received on Tuesday, 26 May 2009 18:50:53 UTC