W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > April to June 2007

Re: sorting tests moved to r2

From: Seaborne, Andy <andy.seaborne@hp.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 14:53:39 +0100
Message-ID: <46811A63.2080509@hp.com>
To: Jeen Broekstra <j.broekstra@tue.nl>
CC: DAWG <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>



Jeen Broekstra wrote:
> Seaborne, Andy wrote:
>> Jeen Broekstra wrote:
>>> Seaborne, Andy wrote:
>>>
...
>>> In other words, two literals with the same lexical form only. It does
>>> not tell us how to order a plain/simple literal and a typed literal with
>>> different lexical values (for example "Alice"^^xsd:string and "Fred").
>>>
>>> And I can't seem to find where this is defined, in fact. What am I
>>> overlooking?
>> The first papagraph says that ordering is by "<" where possible so:
>>
>>   "Alice"^^xsd:string < "Bob"
> 
> [snip]
> 
> Ah, *this* is what I don't get. I am probably overlooking something
> obvious but as far as I can tell "<" is not defined when one operand is
> a plain literal and the other a typed literal.

Eric - can you comment?  I found:

A < B 	simple literal	simple literal
A < B 	xsd:string	xsd:string

but then in the RDF MT:

"7.4 Datatype Entailment Rules"

xsd 1a  uuu aaa "sss".  		uuu aaa "sss"^^xsd:string .
xsd 1b 	uuu aaa "sss"^^xsd:string . 	uuu aaa "sss".

so this is in D-entailment.

> 
> I am not being deliberately obtuse here, but I really am struggling with
>  finding out how/where this is defined in the spec.

Good to check ...

> 
> Jeen

     Andy


-- 
Hewlett-Packard Limited
Registered Office: Cain Road, Bracknell, Berks RG12 1HN
Registered No: 690597 England
Received on Tuesday, 26 June 2007 13:53:52 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:36 GMT