- From: Axel Rauschmayer <axel@rauschma.de>
- Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2010 12:48:22 +0100
- To: nathan@webr3.org
- Cc: Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>
It completely depends on what your application is. What you are trying to do is similar to analyzing unstructured text. Sure, "12.2" looks like a number, but is it really? It could indicate a section in a book. Another example is "100,123" which is between 100 and 101 in many European countries. Why do you even need to infer a type? On Nov 12, 2010, at 12:33 , Nathan wrote: > Hi All, > > I'd suggest that a high percentage of the worlds RDF data is being published untyped, where plain literals are used as rather than typed literals "12.2" vs "12.2"^^xsd:decimal, and also (to a lesser extent) "strings as"^^xsd:string's. > > Until today, I had assumed that it was pretty "safe" to, upon parsing, turn xsd:strings in to plain literals / pull the datatype from the range of a property and turn the object in to the correct type. > > However, it's been suggested to me today that this probably isn't a good thing / "the right thing" to do. > > And thus, should I be avoiding implementing this feature, and additionally what are the reasons *not* to do this. > > An example: > > Ontology contains.. > ex:prop rdfs:range xsd:decimal . > > "data" contains.. > :foo ex:prop "12.2" . > > What reason would there be not to just infer/pull the type and convert to a typed literal? > > Best, > > Nathan > > seeAlso: > http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-plain-literal/ > http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/InterpretationProperties.html > > -- Dr. Axel Rauschmayer Axel.Rauschmayer@ifi.lmu.de http://hypergraphs.de/ ### Hyena: organize your ideas, free at hypergraphs.de/hyena/
Received on Friday, 12 November 2010 11:48:54 UTC