mkroetzsch added a comment.

@Smalyshev

Re "halting the work on the query engine"/"produce code now": The WDTK RDF 
exports are generated based on the original specification. There is no 
technical issue with this and it does not block development to do just this. 
The reason we are in a blocker situation is that you want to move forward with 
an implementation that is different from the RDF model we proposed and that 
goes against our original specification, so that Denny and I are fundamentally 
disagreeing with your design. If you want to return to the original plan, 
please do it and move on. If not, then better wait until Lydia has a conclusion 
for what to do with dates, rather than implementing your point of view without 
consensus. For me, this is a benchmark of whether or not our current discussion 
setup is working.

Here is why I am optimistic that we can align with RDF 1.1 and ISO 8601:2000 
before the query engine would even go live: Basically all calendar-accurate BCE 
dates will be revised and many of them will be changed because of the ongoing 
date review. We can well fix the year zero issue at the same time. Thus we can 
as well work on the hypothesis that dates are in ISO 8601:2000 as originally 
intended. From the feedback we got from the SPARQL group, it seems that this 
would be preferable, if we can make it work technically. The date review is a 
great opportunity to get the whole internal representation back on track.

Re deep value model: the core of the issue is that you propose to represent 
dates as the "original" string. Denny and I have clarified that we don't find 
this an acceptable representation for dates. As opposed to the XSD 1.0 issue, 
this proposal leads to a completely different structure in RDF and queries. 
There is no upgrade path from this implementation to the one we actually want. 
If we can agree on getting rid of this first, this would be a good start to 
move on. Changing from XSD 1.0 to XSD 1.1 is a minor issue in comparison, and 
one which can be deferred in implementation until we have BlazeGraph support 
for this.


TASK DETAIL
  https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T94064

REPLY HANDLER ACTIONS
  Reply to comment or attach files, or !close, !claim, !unsubscribe or !assign 
<username>.

EMAIL PREFERENCES
  https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/

To: Smalyshev, mkroetzsch
Cc: Lydia_Pintscher, Denny, Manybubbles, daniel, mkroetzsch, Smalyshev, 
JanZerebecki, Aklapper, jkroll, Wikidata-bugs, Jdouglas, aude, GWicke



_______________________________________________
Wikidata-bugs mailing list
Wikidata-bugs@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-bugs

Reply via email to