On Tue, 2005-11-08 at 16:55 +0000, Steve Harris wrote: > On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 04:41:33 +0000, Andy Seaborne wrote: > > We seem to be stuck on this one: > > > > == For 1.3 being xsd:decimal: > > > > What gets written is exactly the value in the query itself (because both the > > query and the datatype use a base 10 representation). > > > > Arbitrary precision and precision of more than xsd:double (xsd:decimal > > requires a minimum of 18 digits - I think that's 64 bits of precision) are > > needed for financial information. > > > > It's what XPath uses. > > > > == For 1.3 being a double: > > > > It's what cwm and programming languages do. Note many programming > > languages interpret 1/3 as integer divide (i.e. result integer 1) > > > > It's what SPARQL does at the moment. > > The turtle thing is a big deal, if 1.0 is a decimal, then: > SELECT * WHERE { [] rdf:value 1.0 . } > does not match > [] rdf:value 1.0 . > > That's a big drawback IMHO. You don't think turtle would follow SPARQL and migrate to decimal? > Given that decimals are relatively rare in RDF data in my experience, > having to write "1.0"^^xsd:decimal or 1.0/1 is not that big a deal, its > the same with xsd:float. > > - Steve -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29EReceived on Tuesday, 8 November 2005 16:58:26 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 1 October 2009 14:42:03 GMT