W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > November 2002

Re: Datatype test cases: important ones (please have a look)

From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002 16:11:54 +0000
Message-Id: <>
To: Jan Grant <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>, jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Cc: RDFCore Working Group <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>

At 15:55 20/11/2002 +0000, Jan Grant wrote:
>On Wed, 20 Nov 2002, Brian McBride wrote:
> > The way this is put suggests that
> >
> >   <a> <b> "10"^^xsd:integer .
> >
> > entails all other datatype representations of the same value.
>Within _one_ datatype, that's true - this is rule rdfD 2 in the current
>For multiple datatypes, the MT says this:
>These rules do not support any entailments based on identity between
>values of different datatypes. An obvious generalization of the second
>rule would permit such conclusions, but questions of identity between
>items in value spaces of two different datatypes should be referred to
>the authorities who defined the datatypes.

Oh yes, you are right.  We are straying into specifying things about xsd 
that are not up to us.
But I do think we have to do that for the 10 and 010 cases.  I do think 
those need to be changed, but would want a second opinion.

>- so where I've indicated test cases for equivalence between typed
>literals in different datatypes, these probably fall into the same
>category as JJC's boolean test case: that is, we attach a note to them
>or something but don't approve them as part of the subset of test cases
>that goes with the test case document. People might want to implement
>those entailments, but it's "above and beyond the call".

Right agree.

>Like I said, the test cases I've set out are primarily intended to be
>illustrative of the various issues surrounding DTed literals. Hopefully
>on Friday we can decide what to keep and what to chuck out.

I'm just trying to get a march on Friday; not trying to give you a hard time.

Received on Wednesday, 20 November 2002 11:10:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:54:02 UTC