Re: do bad datatype literals denote [was Re: Datatype test cases ...]

At 17:27 20/11/2002 +0000, Jan Grant wrote:

[...]


>Righto. It looks like the state of play is that the test cases for
>"duff" datatyped literals need a rethink, and I think I'm happier with
>why and how, now. Since Pat's given us a concrete "this is all you get"
>for the DT[xsd:integer]-closure from a duff datatyped literal, that's
>enough to rebuild those test cases. I'll sleep on it and come back
>tomorrow.

Cool.  Just a reminder of

<a> <b> "foo"^^xsd:integer

does not entail

<a> <b> _:v .
_:v rdf:type _:c .
_:c rdf:type rdfs:Datatype .

and it does if we replace "foo" with "10".

I'm not pushing this; there may be a better way.  Just that you don't have 
to do all the work on your own.

Brian