Re: details of rdf:datatype?

>>>Jos De_Roo said:
> 
> 
> that's right Brian, it was an attempt which has to
> be tested much better, but it also works for
> e.g. _:x"+0010" btw (for the moment we just exlude
> xsd:string in the "try numeral-to-number-to-canonical"
> another shortcoming is that we have some value range
> limitation for the xsd:long and xsd:unsignedLong
> in our implementation in Java and C# but there
> are possible solutions for that (i.e. be incomplete
> there)

That's not a proposed datatypes syntax.  I said in last telcon,
it'll be <datatypeuri>"string" - no bnodeid.

Dave

Received on Thursday, 17 October 2002 03:55:48 UTC