- From: Seaborne, Andy <andy.seaborne@hp.com>
- Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 11:41:47 +0100
- To: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
I agree with this comment - looks wrong to me.
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2005OctDec/0339.html
Andy
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: xsd:unsignedByte + xsd:unsignedShort = xsd:decimal?
Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 11:39:56 +0000
Resent-From: public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 13:39:33 +0200
From: Jan Wielemaker <wielemak@science.uva.nl>
Organization: HCS, University of Amsterdam
To: public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org
Hi,
According to SPARQL test 'typePromotion-decimal-decimal-pass' (below),
adding unsignedByte to unsignedShort should return xsd:decimal.
According to http://www.w3.org/TR/xpath-functions/#numeric-functions however
this should be xsd:integer (which makes more sense to me). Am I correct to
conclude this test is wrong?
Thanks --- Jan
# Positive test: product of type promotion within the xsd:decimal type tree.
# $Id: typePromotion-decimal-decimal-pass.rq,v 1.2 2006/01/13 15:24:07 eric
Exp $
PREFIX rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#>
PREFIX xsd: <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#>
SELECT ?one ?two
WHERE { ?one rdf:value ?oneL .
?two rdf:value ?twoL .
FILTER ( datatype(?oneL) = xsd:unsignedByte &&
datatype(?twoL) = xsd:unsignedShort &&
datatype(?oneL + ?twoL) = xsd:decimal ) }
Received on Monday, 26 June 2006 10:43:31 UTC