comment: "XML Schema Datatypes in RDF and OWL"

http://www.w3.org/TR/swbp-xsch-datatypes/ is a useful document, and I 
hope to have a more complete set of comments later on.  However, I 
wanted to make one observation (and suggestion) right away concerning 
material such as Section 5 (The Use of Numeric Types), since the point 
applies to certain other general "best practices" material as well.

Section 5 provides generally-useful advice about representing data for 
engineering and science applications.  I'd like to suggest that in 
conveying such advice, it should be made clear that the issues described 
are not necessarily peculiar to the Semantic Web (or Semantic Web 
languages), but apply generally to the representation of such data (as 
opposed, for example, to issues that arise specifically when XML Schema 
datatypes are used in RDF or OWL).  In this case, for example, similar 
issues would arise in representing engineering data in Java, C++, or 
other languages (I would agree that such issues assume particular 
*importance* in the Semantic Web, due to its presumbed increased 
interoperabilty requirements, but the issues are not peculiar to 
Semantic Web *technology*).  The motivation for making this distinction 
is simply to try to forstall comments of the general form "Semantic Web 
languages have problems representing engineering data" (or whatever the 
particular issue covered happens to be), and citing SWBP documents (I've 
already heard comments to this effect about the Duration issue).

--Frank

Received on Friday, 29 April 2005 13:56:55 UTC