FW: ORDER BY and literals

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
1 message Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

FW: ORDER BY and literals

Polleres, Axel
Final acknowledgement of comment JS-1 (forwarded with permission)

Best,
Axel

-----Original Message-----
From: John Snelson [mailto:[hidden email]]
Sent: Montag, 14. Jänner 2013 10:35
To: Polleres, Axel
Subject: Re: ORDER BY and literals

The fact that there are no "simple literals" in RDF 1.1 seems like an adequate explanation. Thank you for your time.

John

On 10/01/13 15:10, Polleres, Axel wrote:

> Hi John,
>
> I just see that the final reply to your comment might not have not reached you:
>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2012Nov/0
> 006.html
>
> Sorry for the inconvenience, but could you please indicate in a short
> response to [hidden email] whether this addresses your comment?
> The group is about to close down and we would like to see all comments closed.
>
> Thanks a lot,
> Axel, on behalf of the SPARQL WG.
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Andy Seaborne [mailto:[hidden email]]
>> Sent: Donnerstag, 22. November 2012 23:15
>> To: [hidden email]
>> Subject: Re: ORDER BY and literals
>>
>>
>> On 21/11/12 19:38, John Snelson wrote:
>>> We all know that the datatype() function has been changed in SPARQL
>>> 1.1 to reflect the expected reality of RDF 1.1 typing.
>>
>> Clarification:
>>
>> This aspect of datatype() has not changed in SPARQL 1.1.
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-query/#func-datatype
>>
>> Only the datatype of literals-with-language tag has changed (which
>> was an error in SPARQL 1.0 and replacing errors by results is an
>> extension route for SPARQL expressions).
>>
>>> to reflect the expected reality of RDF 1.1 typing.
>>> ... I would prefer ORDER BY to be updated to sort plain literals in
>>> the same way as xsd:string literals.
>>
>> Plain literals covers
>>
>>     + simple literals
>>       (literals without datatype and without language tag
>>        it's SPARQL terminology as there was no RDF term for it.
>>
>>     + literals with a language tag.
>>
>> There are no simple literals (strings with no language tag and no
>> datatype) in RDF 1.1 parsed data.  So the issue of sorting is
>> simplified in RDF 1.1 - the case of two RDF terms having the same
>> value (simple literal and
>> xsd:string) does not arise.  By giving an ordering to the same value
>> but different terms items we get a consistent sort for such items.
>>
>> Plain literals with language tag will have SPARQL DATATYPE of
>> rdf:langString where previously datatype() caused an error.
>>
>> The rule for plain literals does at least mean the ordering between
>> literals- with-language lag and xsd:string is defined (they do not have the same value).
>>
>>        Andy
>


--
John Snelson, Lead Engineer                    http://twitter.com/jpcs
MarkLogic Corporation                         http://www.marklogic.com