- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 13:32:40 +0000
- To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
- CC:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=4881 Summary: Should -NaN be allowed and given a meaning? Product: XML Schema Version: 1.1 only Platform: Macintosh OS/Version: All Status: NEW Keywords: unclassified Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: Datatypes: XSD Part 2 AssignedTo: cmsmcq@w3.org ReportedBy: cmsmcq@w3.org QAContact: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org In his survey of the impact of precision decimal on XPath and XQuery (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-query-wg/2006May/0023.html) [member-only link], Don Chamberlin observes In 754r Section 5.10 we read "totalorder(-NaN, number) is true where -NaN represents a NaN with negative sign bit". (But there is no negative NaN value in XML Schema.) It would appear from this that IEEE 754R assigns distinct meaning, for ordering purposes, to the sign bit of NaN values. Our description of precisionDecimal requires the sign to be absent when the numericalValue is notANumber. Our float and double types have a NaN, but no negative NaN. If IEEE 754 does assign ordering or processing semantics to -NaN, it may perhaps be useful for XPath and the other QT specs if XSDL distinguishes NaN and -NaN. Should our description of NaN be modified to follow 754?
Received on Wednesday, 25 July 2007 13:32:45 UTC