W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rif-wg@w3.org > April 2009

Re: more datatypes

From: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 07:56:10 -0400
Message-ID: <49E86E5A.2010601@deri.org>
To: Dave Reynolds <der@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
CC: "Public-Rif-Wg (E-mail)" <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
Dave Reynolds wrote:
> Axel Polleres wrote:
>> I can't see any resolution to add...
>>
>> # xsd:nonPositiveInteger
>> # xsd:positiveInteger
>> # xsd:negativeInteger
>> # xsd:long
>> # xsd:int
>> # xsd:short
>> # xsd:byte
>> # xsd:unsignedLong
>> # xsd:unsignedInt
>> # xsd:unsignedShort
>> # xsd:unsignedByte
>>
>> although they are in OWL2...I tacitly assume we want those as well?
> 
> Not just tacitly. We explicitly discussed them, e.g.
> 
> "PROPOSED: Add the following primitive data types, without builtins 
> (other than guard predicates) for subtypes of xs:string and xs:integer: 
> xsd:nonPositiveInteger, xsd:positiveInteger, xsd:negativeInteger, 
> xsd:long, xsd:int, xsd:short, xsd:byte, xsd:unsignedLong, 
> xsd:unsignedInt, xsd:unsignedShort, xsd:unsignedByte, xsd:float, 
> xsd:normalizedString, xsd:token, xsd:language, xsd:Name, xsd:NCName, xsd "
> 
> but then found it easier the phrase the final resolution as:
> 
> "RESOLVED: support all OWL datatypes in RIF except owl:rational (to be 
> discussed further)"

stupid me, it just - obviously - wasn't yet copied to the resolutions 
page. all fine, was a bit tired when I wrote that mail, sorry :-)

> Dave


-- 
Dr. Axel Polleres
Digital Enterprise Research Institute, National University of Ireland, 
Galway
email: axel.polleres@deri.org  url: http://www.polleres.net/
Received on Friday, 17 April 2009 11:56:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:34:05 GMT