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

Proposal to close as withdrawn ISSUE-31

From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2008 21:33:02 +0100
Message-Id: <2814757D-C9A2-49DF-919C-6E795DC68E2F@cs.man.ac.uk>
To: "OWL 1.1" <public-owl-wg@w3.org>

I got a little off track with ISSUE-31 because of the way Ian phrased  

I believe I'm the raiser of the issue. I do think events have  
overtaken this issue. When OWL 1.1 started, there were several  
different proposals for how to "do" user defined datatypes. Protege  
had an RDF internal syntax. Pellet used URIs into XML Schema documents.

Even putting aside the fact that we are moving from (the fiction of?)  
tight integration with XSD, I was thinking about what we'd have to do  
to get things up to snuff. We'd have to be pretty specific of the  
form of XSD document we accepted, what things we ignored, etc. etc.  
Seems pretty marginal given the work possibly involved.

Also, if you want to use XSD tools to develop your datatypes  
(assuming we did have alignment) one could always make an extractor/ 
inserter that would take it out of a XML schema document and generate  
the requisite OWL.

Seems a pretty high price to pay. Given that there is, mildly  
speaking, not a lot of enthusiasm for this in the group, I suggest  
that we close this as withdrawn. Or just close it with no action. (I  
don't particularly care.)

Received on Wednesday, 9 July 2008 20:33:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:42:05 UTC