- From: Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
- Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2002 00:55:43 +0100
- To: "Jan Grant <Jan.Grant" <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>
- Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
I now think that :john :birthday "1956-01-10"^^xsd:date . RDFS/XSD entails :john :birthday "1956-01-10T+02:00"^^xsd:date . is wrong in http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/ we can see that [[ If the time zone is included, both hours and minutes must be present. ]] [[ Since the lexical representation allows an optional time zone indicator, date values are partially ordered because it may not be possible to unequivocally determine the order of two values one of which has a time zone and the other does not. If date values are considered as periods of time, the order relation on date values is the order relation on their starting instants. This is discussed in Order relation on dateTime (§3.2.7.3). See also Adding durations to dateTimes (§E). Pairs of date values with or without time zone indicators are totally ordered. ]] I was believing the entailment because Xerces's new DateDatatypeValidator().compare(s1, s2) gives equal, but I now see that .NET using System.Xml DateTime.Compare(XmlConvert.ToDateTime(s1), XmlConvert.ToDateTime(s2)) does't give equal -- , Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
Received on Monday, 18 November 2002 18:56:22 UTC