- From: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
- Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 17:11:48 +0100
- To: "Public-Rif-Wg (E-mail)" <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
here goes a summary of all editor's notes in DTB along with some proposals how they shall be addressed: This completes ACTION-552 http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/track/actions/552 1) Editor's Note: rif:text (in particular, its identifying IRI) is an AT RISK feature. We expect a joint effort with the OWL WG to discuss rif:text and the equivalent OWL datatype, striving for a uniform symbol space for such text strings with a language tag. should be solved by rdf:text, adapted version will be available at http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/InternationalizedStringSpec by next RIF telecon. 2) Editor's Note: We might introduce additional shortcuts, e.g. for rif:text in future versions of this draft. the rdf:text datatype will include the shortcut '"' UNICODESTRING '"@' langtag as a shortcut for: '"' UNICODESTRING@langtag '"^^rdf:text' and both '"' UNICODESTRING '"' and '"' UNICODESTRING '"^^xs:string' will actually be shortcuts for '"' UNICODESTRING '@"^^rdf:text' since xs:string is planned to be a subtype of rdf:textfor rdf:texts with an empty language tag. 3) In the course of the rdf:text discussions, we discussed that a function/predicate for implementing language-pattern matching according to subtag matching according to RFC4647 is needed. (This is not yet reflected by an editor's not in the current draft.) I propose to add: pred:matches-langtag( ?arg1 , ?arg2 ) intended domains: - arg1 rdf:text - arg2 valid language range according to http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4647.txt 4) Editor's Note: The naming convention for guard predicates, particularly whether third parties defining their own datatypes should be encouraged/discouraged to reuse the standard pred: and func: namespaces to define their own built-in predicates and functions, are still under discussion in the working group. PROPOSED: Leave the naming convention as is. 5) Editor's Note: It was noted in discussions of the working group, that except guard predicates, also an analogous built-in function or predicate to SPARQL's datatype function is needed. This however has some technical implications, see http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Jul/0096.html PROPOSED: We could - analogous to pred:iri-to-string, define predicates pred:matches-datatype( ?arg1 ?arg2) such that the predicate is true iff ?arg1 is in the value space of the datatype denoted by ?arg2 . An open question is whether we should use the rif:iri or the string representing the datatypeIRI for the second argument, i.e. what is the intended domain for ?arg2 ?? 6) Editor's Note: The naming convention for negative guard predicates, particularly whether third parties defining their own datatypes should be encouraged/discouraged to reuse the standard pred: and func: namespaces to define their own built-in predicates and functions, are still under discussion in the working group. PROPOSED: Leave the naming convention as is. 7) Editor's Note: In the following, we adapt several cast functions from [XPath-Functions]. Due to the subtle differences in e.g. error handling between RIF and [XPath-Functions], these definitions might still need refinement in future versions of this draft. Indeed I need to check back Jos exact concerns here, he thought that referring to the [XPath-Functions] conversions is not precise enough here, see also 8) 8) Editor's Note: We might split this subsection into separate subsections per casting function in future versions of this document, following the convention of having one separate subsection per funtcion/predicate in the rest of the document. However, it seemed convenient here to group the cast functions which purely rely on XML Schema datatype casting into one common subsection. I can separate them, if the majority of theworking group thinks this is necessary. 9) Editor's Note: The cast from rif:text to xs:string is still under discussion, i.e. whether the lang tag should be included when casting to xs:string or not. PROPOSED. replace rif:text by rdf:text, otherwise leave as is. 10) Editor's Note: Conversion from rif:iri to xs:string and vice versa is still under discussion in the working group since rif:iri is not a datatype. For details, we refer to Issue-61. The following is a strawman proposal which might still change in future versions of this working draft. PROPOSED: That was discussed extensively, the former section 4.3.5 removed, so I think we can consider this done and just remove the note. 11) Editor's Note: The following treatment of built-ins which may have multiple arities is a strawman proposal currently under discussion in the working group. PROPOSED: remove this note and stick with the shorthand introduced in the beginning of section 4.5 for multi-arity functions and preds. 12) Editor's Note: The working group is currently discussing, whether in addition to adopting the fn:compare function from [XPath-Functions], own predicates pred:string-equal, pred:string-less-than, pred:string-greater-than, pred:string-not-equal, pred:string-less-than-or-equal, pred:string-greater-than-or-equal not defined in [XPath-Functions] shall be introduced, following the convention of having such predicates for other datatypes. PROPOSED: introduce additional comparison predicates. 13) Editor's Note: No less-than-or-equal or greater-than-or-equal predicates are defined in this draft for durations, since there are no separate op:dayTimeDuration-equal nor op:yearMonthDuration-equalpredicates in [XPath-Functions], but only a common predicate op:duration-equal. Future versions of this working draft may resolve this by introducing new equality predicates pred:dayTimeDuration-equal and pred:yearMonthDuration-equal with restricted intended domains. PROPOSED: introduce a single predicate duration-equal that only evaluates to true if the arguments are both of the same duration subtype and equal. 14) Editor's Note: Predicates for rdf:XMLLiteral such as at least comparison predicates (equals, not-equals) are still under discussion in the working group. PROPOSED: introduce equals and not-equals for XMLLiteral which matches modulo white-spaces in non-text content. 15) Editor's Note: The current name of this function is still under disscussion in the working group. Alternative proposals include e.g. func:lang-from-text, which follows the XPath/XQuery naming convention for extraction functions from datatypes than the SPARQL naming convention. PROPOSED: change to func:lang-from-text and only add a remark that this is related to SPARQL's lang-function. 16) Editor's Note: We have not yet included comparison predicates (equal, less-than, greater-than, or compare ...) for rif:text. Future versions of this document might introduce these. PROPOSED: only add equal and not-equal for rdf:text, for more sophisticated comparisons conversions to strings and the more fine-grained comparisons on strings can be used. -- Dr. Axel Polleres, Digital Enterprise Research Institute (DERI) email: axel.polleres@deri.org url: http://www.polleres.net/ Everything is possible: rdfs:subClassOf rdfs:subPropertyOf rdfs:Resource. rdfs:subClassOf rdfs:subPropertyOf rdfs:subPropertyOf. rdf:type rdfs:subPropertyOf rdfs:subClassOf. rdfs:subClassOf rdf:type owl:SymmetricProperty.
Received on Monday, 18 August 2008 16:12:36 UTC