- From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
- Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2011 12:53:34 +0100
- To: Birte Glimm <birte.glimm@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
- CC: Matthew Perry <matthew.perry@oracle.com>, W3C SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On 27/03/11 22:33, Birte Glimm wrote: > Matt, others, > I have updated the D-Entailment Regime to require a datatype map with > at least the datatypes suggested by Matt. Literal solutions can only > be canonical representations. I am not quite sure how to interpret XSD > Schema Datatypes though for integers. Normally, the canonicalized > values are always for the primitive type, but that would require that > the canonical representation is inherited from decimal. However, > "10.0"^^xsd:decimal is the canonical representation for 10 as I > understand it, but integers shouldn't have a decimal point. Thus, > "10.0"^^xsd:decimal can hardly be the canonical representation for > "10"^^xsd:integer. Instead I assume that "10"^^xsd:integer is the > canonical form of "10"^^xsd:integer, but also of "010"^^xsd:integer, > "+10"^^xsd:integer, and also "10"^^xsd:short or "10"^^xsd:byte. Anyone > with a better understandingthan me? Am I right in assuing that this is > how I should understand the spec? That's how I read it: http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#decimal-canonical-representation Decimal is 10.0, integer is 10 and derived types from integer are the same as integer canonical form. Andy > > Here's the updated D-ent. regime: > http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/entailment/xmlspec.xml#d-entailment > > Regards, > Birte
Received on Monday, 28 March 2011 11:54:13 UTC