I think this is ok - "ill-typed literal" is also used in other standards (search "ill-typed literal site:w3.org"). This checks the ^^xsd:X literals. sh:nodeKind checks for IRI, bnode, or literal. There's one more type in RDF 1.1 [1] which is the "language-tagged string". We have sh:uniqueLang and sh:languageIn, but is there also a need to check that a literal is language-tagged? kc [1] https://www.w3.org/TR/2014/REC-rdf11-concepts-20140225/#section-Graph-Literal On 10/30/16 10:06 PM, Holger Knublauch wrote: > I have made an edit to implement the resolution to ISSUE-158: > > https://github.com/w3c/data-shapes/commit/77fd283597db8a5897a1d6ee2d53a50024a7c6d7 > > > Could the WG please review that these changes are correct and specific > enough? The RDF spec uses the term "ill-typed literal". I don't know how > to define "the datatypes supported by SPARQL 1.1", and suspect we will > get questions on this. > > Thanks, > Holger > > > -- Karen Coyle kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net m: 1-510-435-8234 skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600Received on Monday, 31 October 2016 15:56:00 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:30:37 UTC