Re: ISSUE-158: Request to review change

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/+1-510-984-3600

Received on Monday, 31 October 2016 15:56:00 UTC