- From: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
- Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2016 09:15:40 +1000
- To: public-data-shapes-wg@w3.org
On 1/11/2016 1:55, Karen Coyle wrote: > I think this is ok - "ill-typed literal" is also used in other > standards (search "ill-typed literal site:w3.org"). > > This checks the ^^xsd:X literals. sh:nodeKind checks for IRI, bnode, > or literal. There's one more type in RDF 1.1 [1] which is the > "language-tagged string". We have sh:uniqueLang and sh:languageIn, but > is there also a need to check that a literal is language-tagged? Being language-tagged is already checked via sh:datatype rdf:langString. So I think that's handled OK. Thanks, Holger > > kc > [1] > https://www.w3.org/TR/2014/REC-rdf11-concepts-20140225/#section-Graph-Literal > > > On 10/30/16 10:06 PM, Holger Knublauch wrote: >> I have made an edit to implement the resolution to ISSUE-158: >> >> https://github.com/w3c/data-shapes/commit/77fd283597db8a5897a1d6ee2d53a50024a7c6d7 >> >> >> >> Could the WG please review that these changes are correct and specific >> enough? The RDF spec uses the term "ill-typed literal". I don't know how >> to define "the datatypes supported by SPARQL 1.1", and suspect we will >> get questions on this. >> >> Thanks, >> Holger >> >> >> >
Received on Monday, 31 October 2016 23:16:15 UTC