W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > August 2007

Re: Datatypes

From: Dave Reynolds <der@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 13:33:18 +0100
Message-ID: <46CD7E8E.6090707@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
To: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
CC: semantic-web@w3.org

Bijan Parsia wrote:
> 
> On 23 Aug 2007, at 09:54, Dave Reynolds wrote:
> 
>> Bijan Parsia wrote:
> [snipped useful stuff]
> 
>>> That's nice. We should have a list somewhere (heck, for all I know, 
>>> pellet's support is derived in part from Jena!).
>>> Does Jena also support the OWL 1.1 RDF vocabulary for defining 
>>> datatypes? (Not that I'm convinced that this is, in general, a good 
>>> idea).
>>
>> No, at least not yet. We're not yet convinced that such replication of 
>> XSD inside OWL is appropriate, though can see some benefits.
> [snip]
> 
> Hmm. That's more than I can see, personally. The main benefits seems to 
> be free use of datatype expressions (versus having to name them) and 
> perhaps the "one file" thang. The latter is rather uninteresting to me. 

Yes, you are right. I must have been feeling too mellow when writing 
that message ;-) I think our original feedback was more robustly negative.

The all-in-one-file is one argument and as you say is hardly exciting.

There is possibly an argument for being able to query the structure of 
the data expression without having to move to a different tool stack but 
I couldn't make such an argument convincingly myself.

> For the former, I'd tend to prefer using fragments of XML Schema 
> (although that has it's own problems).

Reasonable.

Dave
-- 
Hewlett-Packard Limited
Registered Office: Cain Road, Bracknell, Berks RG12 1HN
Registered No: 690597 England
Received on Thursday, 23 August 2007 12:33:40 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 21:45:17 GMT