W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rif-wg@w3.org > July 2008

Re: [RIF] DTB comments

From: Jos de Bruijn <debruijn@inf.unibz.it>
Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2008 10:19:25 +0200
Message-ID: <4878690D.3010406@inf.unibz.it>
To: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
CC: Stella Mitchell <cleo@us.ibm.com>, RIF <public-rif-wg@w3.org>

actually, there is a resolution saying that we need numeric-not-equal, 
F2F10, day 1:

RESOLVED: add builtin predicates to BLD and DTB: 
pred:numeric-less-or-equal, pred:numberic-greater-or-equal, 
pred:numberic-not-equal (they amount to shortcuts, to avoid disjunction).

Jos de Bruijn wrote:
>>>       Section 4.4.2
>>>              add pred:numeric-not-equal
>> Why? It is not backed up by any XPath/XQuery function. If you think we 
>> need inequality-predicates per datatype, I think this should be raised 
>> as an issue. I do not remember any resolution which had decided to do 
>> such a thing.
> There are other functions not backed up by XQuery functions, such as 
> greater than or equal.
> XQuery does not need numeric--not-equal, because as negation.  BLD does 
> not have negation, so one could argue that it should be there.
> In any case, numeric--not-equal can be seen as a shortcut for 
> "numeric-greater or numeric-less", just like numeric-greater-equal is a 
> shortcut for "numeric-greater or numeric-equal".  The question is then: 
> why define a shortcut for the latter case, but not for the former?
> Best, Jos

Jos de Bruijn            debruijn@inf.unibz.it
+390471016224         http://www.debruijn.net/
If knowledge can create problems, it is not
through ignorance that we can solve them.
   - Isaac Asimov
Received on Saturday, 12 July 2008 08:19:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:47:51 UTC