W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > April 2011

typed literal equality

From: Nathan <nathan@webr3.org>
Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2011 18:37:32 +0100
Message-ID: <4DB45FDC.3050200@webr3.org>
To: RDF WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
CC: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
moving to RDF WG list:

Andy Seaborne wrote:
> On 24/04/11 14:42, Nathan wrote:
>> so are we saying that the following are all different for purposes of
>> establishing equality?
>>
>> "100"^^xsd:double
>> "1E2"^^xsd:double
>> "1e2"^^xsd:double
>> "+100"^^xsd:double
>> "+1E2"^^xsd:double
>> "+1e2"^^xsd:double
> 
> They are all different as RDF terms.
> 
> They are the same *value*, different ways of writing it.  RDF (simple 
> entailment) does not say anything about literal values.
> 
> They are the same under XSD D-entailment (which requires full RDFS)

Why?

Sorry but I'm not understanding the benefit to anybody of having things 
defined like this. Can somebody explain?

Best,

Nathan
Received on Sunday, 24 April 2011 17:38:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:25:41 GMT