- From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2008 17:11:30 +0100
- To: Rob Shearer <rob.shearer@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
- Cc: Evan Wallace <ewallace@cme.nist.gov>, public-owl-wg@w3.org
On Jul 9, 2008, at 4:54 PM, Rob Shearer wrote: > I completely agree that a final proposal must deal with > peculiarities of infinities, multiple zeros, and NaN. We have not > yet addressed those issues, but there are many possible solutions > entirely compatible the presented proposal. > > My hope was to find agreement on the general structure of the > datatype system, pending a satisfactory solution to these specific > technical problems. Thanks for the clarification. I'd like this too. -Alan > > On 9 Jul 2008, at 15:22, Evan Wallace wrote: > >> Let me go on record as opposing proposals that simple gloss over >> the peculiarities of >> float and double and treat them as reals (thus I am agreeing with >> Bijan's and Michael Smith's >> positions). I would vastly prefer that we define our own real >> type and use some explicit >> type coercion to compare values across these and other datatypes. >> -Evan >> >
Received on Wednesday, 9 July 2008 16:12:09 UTC