W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-wg@w3.org > February 2008

Re: Action 91 and issue 95

From: Deborah L. McGuinness <dlm@ksl.stanford.edu>
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 12:11:15 -0500
Message-ID: <47C599B3.4060808@ksl.stanford.edu>
To: Evan Wallace <ewallace@cme.nist.gov>
CC: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>, public-owl-wg@w3.org

Evan Wallace wrote:
>
> Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
>> From: Evan Wallace <ewallace@cme.nist.gov>
>> Subject: Re: Agenda for teleconference Wednesday February 27th, 2008
>> Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 14:33:24 -0500
>>
>>  
>>> Boris' action ( documented in 
>>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Feb/0129.html) 
>>> updated the text of
>>> the structural specification document to allow datatypeRestrictions 
>>> only on datatypes.  I am uncomfortable with this new
>>> constraint, although I understand this was decided at last week's 
>>> telecon (I was out sick).      
>>
>> What would you prefer?
>>
>> The syntax restriction was put in to prevent constructs like:
>>
>>    DatatypeRestriction(DataComplementOf(xsd:integer) 
>>                        minExclusive "1"^^xsd:integer)
>>
>> whose meaning is, at best, unclear.
>>
>>   
> My concern about the new constraint is that it will eliminate the 
> ability for communities to define their
> own datatypes and then restrict those.  
I work with communities where it would be valuable to be able to create 
their own datatype and then be able to further restrict these.
> Allowing restrictions of DatatypeRestrictions would support this
> without opening the full Pandora's box of DataComplementOf.  I would 
> be comfortable with this option.
>>> In any case, the action isn't
>>> complete because the metamodel in figure 5, such as it is, hasn't 
>>> been updated to match this new constraint.
>>>     
>>
>> Figure 5 was updated by Boris in 20 February.  It appears to me that the
>> current version of the figure corresponds to the current version of the
>> syntax (modulo the facet and value being valid for the datatype).
>>
>>   
> It may have been updated but it's not completely in sync with the 
> text.  The pertinent part of the text reads, "Finally, the
> datatypeRestriction constructor creates a data range by applying one 
> or more facet restriction to a datatype."  However,
> in Figure 5, seen via 
> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/index.php?title=Syntax&diff=3435&oldid=3313#Data_Ranges 
>
> or http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Syntax (last modified 19:28, 20 Feb 
> 2008), the DatatypeRestriction has an
> association to DataRange when it should be to Datatype.
>>> -Evan
>>>     
>>
>> peter
>>
>>   
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 27 February 2008 17:11:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 27 February 2008 17:11:35 GMT