Thanks for the feedback. I was using dbpedia:ontology/revenue and
dbpedia2:revenue. The dbpedia:ontology/revenue does look like it's
only a value of type of currency but there seem to be a fair number of
companies that do not have that property but dbpedia2:revenue instead.

On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 6:58 AM, Max Jakob <[email protected]> wrote:
> Which property are you using? With
>  http://dbpedia.org/ontology/revenue
> you should only get values of a type of currency.
>
> Cheers,
> Max
>
> On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 02:05, Scott White <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I am trying to write a sparql query against a dbpedia sparql endpoint
>> that says "find all companies that have more than 1B revenue".
>>
>> The problem I see is that the value of revenue for many companies,
>> e.g. Kaiser Permanente, looks like this:
>>
>> "1.3E9"^^dbpedia:datatype/usDollar
>>
>> or for Southwest Airlines like this:
>>
>> "US$11.0 Billion"@en
>>
>> How do I coerce these to a number so that they show up in my results?
>>
>> thanks,
>> Scott
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Achieve unprecedented app performance and reliability
>> What every C/C++ and Fortran developer should know.
>> Learn how Intel has extended the reach of its next-generation tools
>> to help boost performance applications - inlcuding clusters.
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devmay
>> _______________________________________________
>> Dbpedia-discussion mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dbpedia-discussion
>>
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EditLive Enterprise is the world's most technically advanced content
authoring tool. Experience the power of Track Changes, Inline Image
Editing and ensure content is compliant with Accessibility Checking.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/ephox-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
Dbpedia-discussion mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dbpedia-discussion

Reply via email to