RE: pfps-06 hold off?

Just to be sadistic...

Jos, can you test if

 :Jenny :age "10"^^xsd:integer.

 entails
 
 :Jenny :age "10abc"^^xsd:integer.

Knowing how forgiving many scanners can be, I
won't be the least surprised if "10abc" is mapped
to the value 'ten'...

Patrick


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stickler Patrick (NMP/Tampere) 
> Sent: 27 August, 2003 16:04
> To: 'ext Jos De_Roo'
> Cc: 'w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org'; Stickler Patrick (NMP/Tampere)
> Subject: RE: pfps-06 hold off?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ext Jos De_Roo [mailto:jos.deroo@agfa.com]
> > Sent: 27 August, 2003 15:52
> > To: Stickler Patrick (NMP/Tampere)
> > Cc: Stickler Patrick (NMP/Tampere)
> > Subject: RE: pfps-06 hold off?
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Well Patrick, in what I have made of it (but I could
> > have been making further assumptions)
> > 
> > :Jenny :age "10"^^xsd:integer.
> > 
> > entails
> > 
> > :Jenny :age "10.0"^^xsd:integer.
> > 
> > and vice versa!
> > (tested with Xerces and .NET)
> 
> HAH! I expected as much.
> 
> I rest my case.
> 
> This an XML "problem" and changing our definition of the L2V
> mapping and our strict view about valid lexical forms is just
> begging for trouble.
> 
> Patrick
>