W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-dev@w3.org > January to March 2007


From: Evren Sirin <evren@clarkparsia.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 10:16:28 -0500
Message-ID: <45DB10CC.3060905@clarkparsia.com>
To: public-owl-dev@w3.org

Looking at the OWL 1.1 spec I believe the following user-defined 
datatypes definitions are not valid:

<owl:DataRange rdf:about="#GreaterThan10">
  <owl11:onDataRange rdf:resource="&xsd;nonNegativeInteger"/>

<owl:DataRange rdf:about="#Between10and20">
  <owl11:onDataRange rdf:resource="#GreaterThan10"/>

This is because the user defined datatypes cannot have names in the 
functional syntax and mapping these to the functional style syntax would 
give something like

DatatypeRestriction( xsd:nonNegativeInteger owl11:minInclusive 10 )
DatatypeRestriction( GreaterThan10 owl11:maxInclusive 20 )

where the connection between GreaterThan10 and its definition is lost. 
This is unfortunate because it means we need to duplicate the 
definitions of user-defined datatypes (in both syntaxes) since we cannot 
refer to them by their name. It would be much more convenient for 
ontology developers if the functional style syntax is slightly changed 
so we have instead

DatatypeRestriction( GreaterThan10 xsd:nonNegativeInteger 
owl11:minInclusive 10 )
DatatypeRestriction( Between10and20 GreaterThan10 owl11:maxInclusive 20 )


PS: I notice that Table 5 in the RDF/XML mapping document has some 
typos. The second column in the first row should probably be 
DataComplementOf( DRANGE(y) ) and in the third row it should be 
DatatypeRestriction( DRANGE(y) facet ct ).
Received on Tuesday, 20 February 2007 15:16:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:58:14 UTC