- From: Peter F.Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2009 12:09:23 -0400
- To: <andy.seaborne@hp.com>
- CC: <lee@thefigtrees.net>, <sandro@w3.org>, <team-sparql-chairs@w3.org>, <team-rif-chairs@w3.org>, <team-owl-chairs@w3.org>, <public-rdf-text@w3.org>
From: "Seaborne, Andy" <andy.seaborne@hp.com> Subject: RE: deciding on rdf:PlainLiteral this week Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2009 09:05:03 -0500 > I am looking for explicit text that covers the use of SPARQL extended > matching [3] but the draft does not include any text that refers to, > only to SPARQL syntax and SPARQL results. Umm. What more do you want? > [1] option 2 would cover it. Section 4 is a tolerable place to put it > tough not ideal. > > The response in [2] did mention "queries, bindings, and results" > which is not very precise but at least covers the right area. > However, I now can't find any mention of that text in the current > .../PlainLiteral draft. > > Section 4 says > "in syntaxes for RDF graphs and for SPARQL" > "do not occur in syntaxes for RDF graphs, nor in syntaxes for SPARQL." > > This is SPARQL syntax (the query string), not the matching (the output > of the matching step). Because rdf:PlainLiteral covers a non-datatype > aspect, it need to be clear that bindings from BGP extended matching > MUST be in existing forms. What forms? In a *very* strong sense, rdf:PlainLiteral typed literals are already in existing forms. > This also does not cover it: > "in existing syntaxes for RDF graphs and SPARQL results." > > We are not talking just about SPARQL XML results format (which should > be covered) but about how the extended matching fits into existing > implementations and how bindings flow from one BGP matching to another > in the same query, possibly where the BGP matching are under different > entailment regimes. Applying to the extended matching would > automatically include SPARQL XML results although it is good to call > those out anyway, as the draft does (may be written by a non-SPARQL > engine). Are you saying that you want to change the internals of SPARQL? > Andy > > > [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-text/2009AprJun/0229.html > [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-text/2009AprJun/0230.html > [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-query/#sparqlBGPExtend peter
Received on Monday, 1 June 2009 16:11:15 UTC