W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-wg@w3.org > February 2009

Re: What happens when an ontology has data literals that are outside the range handled

From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2009 14:19:08 +0000
Message-Id: <4FD4FBC0-36D7-494E-8AA3-2C327BC752C4@cs.man.ac.uk>
Cc: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>, Ian Horrocks <ian.horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk>, public-owl-wg Working Group <public-owl-wg@w3.org>, Jos de Bruijn <debruijn@inf.unibz.it>
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>

On 13 Feb 2009, at 13:33, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:

> From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: What happens when an ontology has data literals that  
> are outside the range handled
> Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2009 01:35:06 -0800
[snip]
>> Additionally, an OWL 2 entailment checker:
>> ...
>> must return Error if an input document uses datatypes that are not
>> supported by its datatype map or literals that exceed any limits it
>> has on datatype literals or datatype values
>
> Seems relatively benign.

Meh. I don't think so. I'd prefer to not proscribe what the checker  
does (which might depend on configuration options) and just say that  
it *is* an error. Or even:

A conforming checker must make clear the behavior of the system when  
the input document blah blah blah.

I.e., something that encourages people to do a useful thing rather  
than an unusful thing.

Cheers,
Bijan.
Received on Friday, 13 February 2009 14:15:42 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 13 February 2009 14:15:45 GMT