- 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