- From: Rob Shearer <rob.shearer@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
- Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2008 11:24:51 +0100
- To: public-owl-wg@w3.org
- Cc: Michael Smith <msmith@clarkparsia.com>
- Message-Id: <7A397C76-3F78-498A-A2AA-5D4A8092E510@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
> Further, I have concern that because the lexical space allows > arbitrary > precision and due to alternative, inconsistent rounding > implementations > (permitted by XSD 1.1 [2], see 3.3.5.2) the lexical to value-space > mapping could differ between implementations. Thus, two reasoners with > xsd conformant lexical to value mapping algorithms could correctly > produce different entailments. (I don't have access to IEEE-754 to > look > into the details here, I'm basing my statements on [2]). I've just been looking through IEEE-754. Although it does allow for some differences in rounding implementations, it places (quite strict) limits on the possible error introduced. My understanding is that this means it is possible to encode any floating-point number in decimal to sufficient precision that any IEEE-754-compliant translation back to floating point results in exactly the same value. Assuming that my understanding is correct, this means that it is perfectly safe to serialize floats as `xsd:float` within an OWL file without loss of precision: although there do exist `xsd:float` strings whose exact values are not precisely defined, users always have unambiguous representations available to them. So I recommend sticking with the semantics for lexical representations defined in the XSchema spec. -rob
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: smime.p7s
Received on Thursday, 10 July 2008 10:25:29 UTC