Re: draft response for 43b ZW3b

Looks fine to me (modulo missing link to diffs).

Ian


On 24 Feb 2009, at 15:42, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:

> [Draft Response for LC Comment 43b:] ZW2b
>
> Dear Zhe,
>
> Thank you for your message
>   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2009Jan/0083.html
> on the OWL 2 Web Ontology Language last call drafts.
>
> Your message contains multiple sections, affecting more than one
> document, and will thus generate multiple replies.  This response
> is for sections 4 and 8 about the datatypes in OWL 2 RL.
>
> We have adjusted the datatypes of OWL 2 RL to include those XML Schema
> datatypes that are derived from xsd:string and xsd:integer, including
> xsd:positiveInteger.  These were excluded from OWL 2 RL because of a
> mistaken analogy with OWL 2 EL and OWL 2 QL, namely that  
> intersection of
> value spaces must be either empty or infinite to maintain the desired
> properties of the profile.  It turns out that this is not needed in  
> OWL
> 2 RL to obtain its desired computational properties.  As any OWL 2 RL
> tool has to process xsd: string and xsd:integer, the added
> implementation burden to support these datatypes is negligible.
>
> The situation with owl:rational and owl:real is different.  The  
> working
> group has received complaints that implementing
> these datatypes may require significant effort on top of a rule
> reasoner.  Therefore owl:rational and owl:real have been removed from
> OWL 2 RL.  This possibility was mentioned in Feature At Risk #2.
>
> The diffs for these changes can be found at
> .....
>
> The working group notes that Oracle has also brought up concerns with
> the treatment of xsd:float and xsd:double.  These two datatypes are  
> not
> currently part of OWL 2 RL.   If this situation changes the working
> group will communicate with you.
>
> Please acknowledge receipt of this email to
> <mailto:public-owl-comments@w3.org> (replying to this email should
> suffice). In your acknowledgment please let us know whether or not you
> are satisfied with the working group's response to your comment.
>
> Regards,
> Peter F. Patel-Schneider
> on behalf of the W3C OWL Working Group
>

Received on Monday, 2 March 2009 17:16:17 UTC