W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > August 2003

RE: pfps-06 hold off?

From: <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 16:00:38 +0300
Message-ID: <A03E60B17132A84F9B4BB5EEDE57957B5FBC4F@trebe006.europe.nokia.com>
To: <jos.deroo@agfa.com>
Cc: <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, <phayes@ihmc.us>, <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>, <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>



> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Jos De_Roo [mailto:jos.deroo@agfa.com]
> Sent: 27 August, 2003 15:44
> To: Stickler Patrick (NMP/Tampere)
> Cc: bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com; Stickler Patrick (NMP/Tampere); 
> phayes@ihmc.us;
> w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
> Subject: RE: pfps-06 hold off?
> 
> 
> 
> For example in the testcase
> 
> does
> 
> :Jenny :age "33"^^xsd:integer.
> 
> rdf:, xsd:integer entail
> 
> :Jenny :age " 33 "^^?D.
> 
> (but I should have better written
> :Jenny :age " 33 "^^_:D.
> here in RDFCore)
> 
> and our answer is
> :Jenny :age " 33 "^^xsd:integer.


The answer is 'no' because " 33 " is not a member of the
lexical space of xsd:integer and thus is not equivalent
to the lexical form "33".

The fact that you get 'yes' is because you are not actually
testing the validity of the lexical form, but applying
a coercion function that is not equivalent to the L2V
mapping, as provided by a tool intended to operate
in a looser environment, allowing spurious whitespace,
rather than deal with actual lexical forms of XML Schema 
simple types.

Again, what do you get if the test is the following:

  Does
 
  :Jenny :age "33"^^xsd:integer.
 
  rdf:, xsd:integer entail
 
  :Jenny :age "33.0"^^?D.

???

Patrick
Received on Wednesday, 27 August 2003 09:06:26 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:59:42 EDT