W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > March 2004

Re: Turtle terse rdf triple language updates

From: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 11:23:58 +0000
To: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
Cc: www-rdf-interest <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Message-Id: <20040326112358.4780bfc4@hoth.ilrt.bris.ac.uk>

On Fri, 26 Mar 2004 10:06:52 +0000, Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org> wrote:

> At 15:26 25/03/04 +0000, Dave Beckett wrote:
> >The second was a new feature to make OWL constraints much easier to
> >type; the addition of integer literals.  These are non-negative
> >decimal integers with an xsd:integer datatype, again matching what
> >cwm does for such things. This added another new grammar term
> >http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/discovery/2004/01/turtle/#integer
> 
> My recollection is that the OWL cardinalities are expressed as 
> xsd:nonNegativeInteger values.  It's not clear to me that RDF has a way to 
> allow xsd:integer values where these are required, though I think the other 
> way would work through datatype subclass membership; e.g.:
> 
>     _:x a xsd:nonNegativeInteger .
>     xsd:nonNegativeInteger rdfs:subClassOf xsd:integer .
> |-
>     _:x a xsd:integer .
> 
> But not the other way round.

OWL also allows xsd:integer and this is what cwm uses/generates.  I discussed
this with Tim and Dan and we came to the conclusion it was a better choice.

If you read the changelog in the turlle page, I give the links to the
parts of the OWL documents.

Dave
Received on Friday, 26 March 2004 06:30:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 18 February 2014 13:20:07 UTC