Re: deciding on rdf:PlainLiteral this week

From: "Seaborne, Andy" <andy.seaborne@hp.com>
Subject: RE: deciding on rdf:PlainLiteral this week
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2009 11:19:35 -0500

>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Peter F.Patel-Schneider [mailto:pfps@research.bell-labs.com]
>> Sent: 1 June 2009 17:09
>> To: Seaborne, Andy
>> 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
>> Subject: Re: deciding on rdf:PlainLiteral this week
>> 
>> 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?
> 
> The text you proposed to cover bindings was enough.  It has gone and I
> don't see by text that covers it now.
> 
> What text in the draft do you see as already covering this? because I
> don't see any now.
> 
>> 
>> > [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.
> 
> As this is being placed under the section "Syntax for rdf:PlainLiteral
> Literals", and while this is bending that title a bit, I was suggesting
> that the interaction with literal accessors was viewed as syntax.  But
> the doc talks about "results" and query syntax and that does not cover
> the algebra and FILTERs.  "results" applied to the overall results, not
> the interaction of layers.
> 
>> 
>> > 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?
> 
> Exactly the opposite.  SPARQL defines an extension framework - the
> definers of the extensions are then responsible for the exact details of
> each extension.

Which definers of what extension here?

> 	Andy

peter

Received on Monday, 1 June 2009 16:22:35 UTC