W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-swd-wg@w3.org > October 2008

Re: some thoughts about the OWL WG comments

From: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2008 09:43:15 +0200
Message-ID: <48F2FC13.1030706@few.vu.nl>
To: Alistair Miles <alistair.miles@zoo.ox.ac.uk>
CC: Guus Schreiber <schreiber@cs.vu.nl>, SWD WG <public-swd-wg@w3.org>

Hi,

There is something I don't understand here: if we do not need to use 
custom user-defined datatypes when one needs only one notation, what 
should be used in that case then? No datatype?

Antoine

> Hi Guus,
>
> On Thu, Oct 09, 2008 at 04:03:19PM +0200, Guus Schreiber wrote:
>   
>> NOTATIONS
>>
>> [[
>>   The OWL WG notes that one portion of SKOS (Notations) uses custom
>> datatypes.  Although these seem to be benign, because RDF and OWL allow
>> extra datatypes, the use of these datatypes is not likely to be
>> supported by many tools.  The presence of extra datatypes may cause
>> difficulties in some tools, which may just reject SKOS documents that
>> have these datatypes.
>> ]]
>>
>> Sean already pointed out that we can indicate in the document that  
>> user-defined datatypes are only explicitly needed when one needs  
>> multiple notations (so only in Sec. ). In addition I would like to add  
>> the tools should not reject SKOS documents containing user-defined  
>> datatypes, see the OWL reference section on datatype reasoning [2], in  
>> particular the last sentence:
>>
>> [[
>>   Unrecognized datatypes should be treated in the same way as  
>> unsupported datatypes.
>> ]]
>>     
>
> This approach seems sound to me.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Alistair.
>
>   
Received on Monday, 13 October 2008 13:05:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 13 October 2008 13:05:55 GMT