On 24/06/15 16:21, Chris Dollin wrote:
Okay, but where should the type be stored in that case? In another field,
analoguous to langField?
Could use the same field with a flag for language vs type.
Right.
Since the field is already/currently intended for language tags, maybe
it could store datatypes using a prefix such as "@type:", e.g.
"@type:http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#boolean";. Then the language tags
could be stored as they currently are, with no special flag. The
"@type:" prefix would make the value syntactically invalid as a language
tag, ensuring that there is no ambiguity.
A bit ugly, but it should work, and it would avoid introducing yet
another field into the index. Since datatypes and language tags never
coexist on the same literal, storing them in the same field makes sense.
Not at present. But if we're going to handle languaged literals,
I don't see why we shouldn't handle typed literals as well.
OK.
-Osma
--
Osma Suominen
D.Sc. (Tech), Information Systems Specialist
National Library of Finland
P.O. Box 26 (Kaikukatu 4)
00014 HELSINGIN YLIOPISTO
Tel. +358 50 3199529
[email protected]
http://www.nationallibrary.fi
