You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I believe that the RDF to object conversion, step 2.3.4, has a blind spot.
This is in the case useNativeTypes is used:
if the datatype IRI of value equals xsd:integer or xsd:double and its lexical form is a valid xsd:integer or xsd:double according [XMLSCHEMA11-2], set converted value to the result of converting the lexical form to a JSON number.
The problem is: some valid literals of these datatypes may fail to convert to JSON numbers, e.g. "+INF"^^xsd:double, or very large integers.
The spec is currently silent about that. We should either specify that an error must be raised, or that useNativeType should be ignored in that case, and a regular value object should be generated. I personally prefer the 2nd option.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
numbers that do not have a natural place in the current JSON ecosystem MUST be wrapped using the JSON string type.
This is aligned with my suggestion above: whenever a literal can not be mapped to a JSON number, ignore useNativeType and keep it as a value object with explicit @value (as a string) and @type.
I believe that the RDF to object conversion, step 2.3.4, has a blind spot.
This is in the case
useNativeTypes
is used:The problem is: some valid literals of these datatypes may fail to convert to JSON numbers, e.g.
"+INF"^^xsd:double
, or very large integers.The spec is currently silent about that. We should either specify that an error must be raised, or that
useNativeType
should be ignored in that case, and a regular value object should be generated. I personally prefer the 2nd option.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: