- From: bergi <bergi@axolotlfarm.org>
- Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 22:57:19 +0100
- To: WebID Incubator Group WG <public-xg-webid@w3.org>
> Currently we use the cert:hex datatype, which was especially > invented to be easy to read for humans: it is possible nearly to copy > and paste a hex from a certificate viewer or from openssl tools and > get it right. It is extreemly lenient. But it is less standard than > using the xsd datatypes that are discussed in the RDF semantics > document http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-mt/#dtype_interp > > - xsd:base64Binary > - xsd:hexBinary -1 What the modulus really contains is an integer. The xsd:*Binary types don't define how to convert the data. There are many different ways to store integer values (big/little endian or even binary coded decimal...). If we use one of *Binary types we must add a description of their usage to the rsa:modulus property. I think that's not the idea of data types - They should be self describing. xsd:string +1 With xsd:string everything is like it's now, except it's no longer necessary to provide a data type in the RDF document and SPARQL query. One could argue that the rsa:modulus property requires a description how the contained data is coded, but in my opinion that's OK for a literal. The ASK SPARQL query should also work with "FILTER regex()".
Received on Wednesday, 16 November 2011 21:57:57 UTC