- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 12:49:29 +0200
- To: "Wallmer, Martin" <Martin.Wallmer@softwareag.com>, "'Julian Reschke'" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, <www-webdav-dasl@w3.org>
> From: www-webdav-dasl-request@w3.org > [mailto:www-webdav-dasl-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Wallmer, Martin > Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2002 4:35 PM > To: 'Julian Reschke'; www-webdav-dasl@w3.org > Subject: RE: gte vs. numerical property values > > > > Hi, > > good idea to deal with datatypes :-) > > some questions > a:) > how the server may happen to have information about the type of a dead > property? For instance, using: http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-reschke-webdav-property-datatypes-lat est.html Similar type systems exist in MS Exchange and MS Sharepoint. > b:) > what if the server knows about the datatype, and the type in the > query does > not match? Then it should fall back to a string comparison. > Extended proposal: > > b) A client can enforce comparison using a specific data type by > specifying > the type in the query, for instance using: > > <gte xmlns="DAV:"> > <prop><foo xmlns=""/></prop> > <literal xsi:type="xs:long">3</literal> > </gte> Another proposal that may be easier to grok for people that don't want to use XSD data types: <gte xmlns="DAV:"> <prop><foo xmlns=""/></prop> <literal-number>3</literal-number> </gte> This has the advantage of simplicity (do we more than boolean/string/number/date in basicsearch?), but wouldn't be backward-compatible with older drafts. Julian -- <green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
Received on Wednesday, 23 October 2002 06:50:02 UTC