Re: RDF 2.0 Wishlist - Legal RDF which I can't SPARQL

<snip/>

On 6 Aug 2010, at 00:19, Jeremy Carroll wrote:

> On 7/29/2010 4:20 AM, Mischa Tuffield wrote:
>> 
>> The issue arises because turtle doesn't forbid the use of certain characters, for example the backtick " ` " (%60), where as SPARQL does forbid it. Which means that I can write legal turtle, import it into my triplestore, but I wont be able to ever query that data via SPARQL.
> 
> Late to this party, I have very little sympathy with Mischa's issue.
> 
> First I would draw attention to the small print in RDF Concepts ...
> 
> [[
> Note: this section anticipates an RFC on Internationalized Resource Identifiers. Implementations may issue warnings concerning the use of RDF URI References that do not conform with [IRI draft] or its successors.
> ]]
> we knew there may be changes - like the space issue, and this small print was intended to (somewhat naughtily) include changes made elsewhere in the future in the 2004 document.

I must have missed the subtle message by not reading in between the lines there. 

> 
> If I have understood Mischa correctly, the problem is that it is possible to enter illegal IRIs into a triple store in some fashion (e.g. turtle, and then stuff doesn't work. Surprise, surprise: garbage in, garbage out.

I think blaming turtle is harsh, as far as my reading of the spec goes, I can make use of URIs (with for example with a ` inside) in a valid RDF/XML document (as well as in turtle), which I can then import into a triplestore. If i tried to import the same triples into my triplestore using an "INSERT DATA" sparql update call, I will get an error back. I take this is due to the fact that SPARQL and RDF/XML (as this is the only RDF rec I am familiar with par - as I am not that well versed in RDFa) have different notions of what their URIs can be. 
 
> Solution: use a triple store that validates its input and rejects garbage; tackle the problem at source.

The triplestore I use, correctly validates legal RDF (as per turtle and RDF/XML specs by allowing URIRefs), and also correctly validates SPARQL as per spec (by only allowing IRIs). 

> If the turtle spec permits illegal IRIs then that is a bug with the spec.

Well, this logic makes me think that there is a bug in the RDF/XML spec too then?

> If a turtle implementation allows illegal IRIs then that may be a feature, but one that needs to be used with care.

And yes agreed, my whole point is that given the current use of IRIs and URIRefs in the SPARQL and RDF/XML specs respectively, one needs to very careful when developing software.

> Dogmatically
> 
> Jeremy

Mischa

>  
> 
> 

___________________________________
Mischa Tuffield PhD
Email: mischa.tuffield@garlik.com
Homepage - http://mmt.me.uk/
Garlik Limited, 1-3 Halford Road, Richmond, TW10 6AW
+44(0)845 645 2824  http://www.garlik.com/
Registered in England and Wales 535 7233 VAT # 849 0517 11
Registered office: Thames House, Portsmouth Road, Esher, Surrey, KT10 9AD