- From: Steve Harris <S.W.Harris@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2005 16:55:38 +0000
- To: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 04:41:33 +0000, Andy Seaborne wrote:
> We seem to be stuck on this one:
>
> == For 1.3 being xsd:decimal:
>
> What gets written is exactly the value in the query itself (because both the
> query and the datatype use a base 10 representation).
>
> Arbitrary precision and precision of more than xsd:double (xsd:decimal
> requires a minimum of 18 digits - I think that's 64 bits of precision) are
> needed for financial information.
>
> It's what XPath uses.
>
> == For 1.3 being a double:
>
> It's what cwm and programming languages do. Note many programming
> languages interpret 1/3 as integer divide (i.e. result integer 1)
>
> It's what SPARQL does at the moment.
The turtle thing is a big deal, if 1.0 is a decimal, then:
SELECT * WHERE { [] rdf:value 1.0 . }
does not match
[] rdf:value 1.0 .
That's a big drawback IMHO.
Given that decimals are relatively rare in RDF data in my experience,
having to write "1.0"^^xsd:decimal or 1.0/1 is not that big a deal, its
the same with xsd:float.
- Steve
Received on Tuesday, 8 November 2005 16:55:52 UTC