- From: Jeen Broekstra <jeen.broekstra@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 11:09:23 +1300
- To: Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org>
- CC: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>, public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org
On 29/03/2011 10:13, Jeen Broekstra wrote: [snip] > This is not quite enough as it does not check that the operands are > _valid_ typed literals. You'd still want "xyz"^^xsd:integer != > "foo"^^xsd:string to raise a type error, I think. Minor addendum: it took me five seconds after hitting 'send' (I really hate it when that happens) to realize that this of course _also_ holds for the operator mapping table. Simply mapping != to 'true' will not quite be enough, it still needs the proviso that both operands have a correct lexical-to-value mapping. Jeen
Received on Monday, 28 March 2011 22:10:01 UTC