- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Fri, 9 May 2003 15:22:01 +0200
- To: <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>, <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
> > > > No it doesn't entail at all. > > > > " 3 " is not an integer but "3" is. So the second graph is > > not a consequence > > of the first, because the whitespace makes a difference. > > > > (I frankly haven't a clue what the second graph means - I > > promised Brian I > > would read the semantics editors draft before the telecon, so > > I might know > > by then). > > Hmmm.... > > This is an interesting entailment. > > I think the key question is whether XML Schema whitespace processing > is part of the XML Schema specific interpretation of typed literals > having XSD datatypes. > > You are saying that it is not. Is there anything from the XML Schema > specs or the XML Schema WG that support that? > > IMO, it's really for the XML Schema folks to say whether " 3 " > is or is not an acceptable lexical representation when interpreted > in terms of the datatype xsd:int. > > It might be. > > My presumption was that it would be. > > If there is some clear evidence showing that my presumption is > incorrect, I'd like to know it. We might not be ready to close this one. The XML Schema rec is clear (sort of like the RDF working drafts :) that whitespace normalization is performed in part 1, but precisely which processing is specified in part 2. i.e. the processing chain is: input-text => entity substitution => whitespace normalization => [[Lexical Form]] => lexical-to-value mapping => value If you look at http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#decimal for example, the defn of lexical space does not include the leading and trailing blanks. Whitespace normalization is specified in http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-xmlschema-1-20010502/#section-White-Space-Norm alization-during-Validation Jeremy
Received on Friday, 9 May 2003 09:22:14 UTC