- From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 14:11:47 +0100
- To: "Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
My reading of schema datatypes is that with a union type: o a lexical form can be ambiguous - i.e. might map to different values depending on which component type is used to do the mapping o the component types of a union are ordered by the order they are declared when defining the union o by default the ambiguity is resolved by applying the first type whose lex space includes the literal o the default can be overridden by using an xsi:type attribute In RDF we always use the default disambiguation rule. If you want to override, use a more specific datatype in the rdf:datatype attribute. I guess I'm missing something. Brian At 14:17 28/04/2003 +0200, Jeremy Carroll wrote: >I am increasingly worried by > >http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#xmlsch-04 > >see > >http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2003Apr/0281.html > >(it does not seem to have made it into www-rdf-comments yet) > >Jeremy
Received on Monday, 28 April 2003 09:10:57 UTC