W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > September 2010

Re: Any objections against using xsd:anySimpleType or rdfs:Literal as the rdfs:range for OWL datatype properties?

From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2010 14:55:53 -0400
Message-ID: <AANLkTimkO5gn3CNZMkRfQtEebA9anPm0Dodp+58ceDCx@mail.gmail.com>
To: Martin Hepp <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>
Cc: nathan@webr3.org, semantic-web@w3.org, public-lod@w3.org
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 2:51 PM, Martin Hepp
<martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org> wrote:
> NB:
>
> It seems that OWL 2 supports
>
> DataUnionOf( xsd:float xsd:decimal )
>
> The question is how broadly current apps and repositories already support
> OWL 2, in particular "at Web scale", outside of small, controlled
> environments.

What would "support" mean? My guess is that unaware applications
ignore the datatype.

> So I guess rdfs:Literal is the better choice for the moment.

I'd probably use the DataUnionOf( xsd:float xsd:double xsd:decimal) if
what you want to express is that you are using a numeric type.

-Alan


>
> Martin
>
>
> On 23.09.2010, at 20:21, Martin Hepp wrote:
>
>> Hi all:
>> Thanks! So I understand that for an owl:DatatypeProperty that may hold
>> xsd:float, xsd:integer, xsd:int, xsd:double, or xsd:decimal values, the
>> simplest solution is rdfs:Literal.
>>
>> Is that correct?
>>
>> xsd:decimal would include xsd:integer and xsd:int (?), but there is no
>> standard datatype that defines the union of float/double/decimal.
>>
>> Any other solutions?
>>
>> Best
>>
>> Martin
>>
>>
>> On 23.09.2010, at 14:59, Nathan wrote:
>>
>>> Martin Hepp wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Dear all:
>>>> Are there any theoretical or practical problems caused by defining the
>>>> range of an owl:DatatypeProperty as
>>>> http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#anySimpleType
>>>
>>> RDF Semantics has a good discussion on this at:
>>> http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-mt/#dtype_interp
>>>
>>> note that:
>>> "The other built-in XML Schema datatypes are unsuitable for various
>>> reasons, and SHOULD NOT be used: xsd:duration does not have a well-defined
>>> value space (this may be corrected in later revisions of XML Schema
>>> datatypes, in which case the revised datatype would be suitable for use in
>>> RDF datatyping); xsd:QName and xsd:ENTITY require an enclosing XML document
>>> context; xsd:ID and xsd:IDREF are for cross references within an XML
>>> document; xsd:NOTATION is not intended for direct use; xsd:IDREFS,
>>> xsd:ENTITIES and xsd:NMTOKENS are sequence-valued datatypes which do not fit
>>> the RDF datatype model."
>>>
>>> Because a range of xsd:anySimpleType effectively includes/allows the use
>>> of xsd:duration and the aforementioned then it may not be the best range.
>>>
>>> All "afaict" :) Best,
>>>
>>> Nathan
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
Received on Thursday, 23 September 2010 19:04:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 21:45:38 GMT