- From: Seaborne, Andy <andy.seaborne@hp.com>
- Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 09:23:44 +0100
- To: "Eric Prud'hommeaux" <eric@w3.org>
- CC: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>, RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Eric Prud'hommeaux wrote: > On Mon, Sep 19, 2005 at 01:51:39PM +0100, Dave Beckett wrote: > >>There seems to be a clash between: >> "Functions invoked with an argument of the wrong type will produce a >> type error." (11.2) >>vs >> "When a operand is coerced to xs:boolean through invoking a function >> that takes a xs:boolean argument, the following rules apply: ..." >> (11.2.2) >> >>which seems to imply that an arguments to a function that are of type >>xsd:boolean are always co-erced and never produce a type error? The only defined functions/operators to take booleans are sop:logical-or, sop:logical-and and fn:not. It might be clearer to explicitly talk about them and give the "not" truth table. Are extension functions typed? I would hope that EBV rules do not apply and they get passed their arguments as-is. Andy > > > I believe that is true. The ebv rules will give a boolean from any > arguments. > > >>If that's the case, I suggest changing 11.2 something like: >> Functions invoked with an argument of the wrong type (except >> xsd:boolean) will produce a type error. >> Functions requiring an argument of type xs:boolean are coerced to >> xs:boolean using the EBV rules in section 11.2.2 > > > Done (1.503) > > >>(Maybe there should be a new sub-section called "Type Errors"?) >> >>Dave >>
Received on Tuesday, 11 October 2005 08:25:12 UTC