- From: Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>
- Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2010 14:17:24 +0100
- To: nathan@webr3.org
- Cc: Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>
Where are you getting this data Nathan? The reason there is probably a lot of broken data out there is that it is not used. The trick is to start making that data useful in everyday context. Then of course slowly it will fix itself. If someone's has few people coming to his party because he published the data badly, he'll soon fix it... Henry On 12 Nov 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 > Social Web Architect http://bblfish.net/
Received on Friday, 12 November 2010 13:17:57 UTC