Re: proposal to close Issue 5.8 Datatypes

From: "Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Subject: RE: proposal to close Issue 5.8 Datatypes
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2002 17:35:50 +0100

[...]

> > 3/ OWL will include all XML Schema built-in non-list simple
> > types, using the
> >    canonical URI reference for them.
> 
> Exclude xsd:QName, xsd:ENTITY, xsd:NOTATION
> 
> (see
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2002Nov/att-0092/02-index.ht
> ml#context
> )

Hmm.  This appears to mean that some XML Schema types do not have a
well-defined context-independent lexical-to-value mapping!  I agree that
such types cannot be handled under the RDF datatyping proposal. 

> > 4/ OWL can use XML Schema non-list simple types defined at the top
> >    level of an XML Schema document and given a name, by using the URI
> >    reference constructed from the URI of the document and the
> > local name of
> >    the simple type.  That is, if U is the URI of an XML Schema document
> >    that contains,
> >    <xsd:schema ...>
> >      <xsd:simpleType name="foo">
> >        <xsd:restriction base="integer">
> >         <xsd:minInclusive value="1700">
> >        </xsd:restriction>
> >      </xsd:simpleType>
> >      ...
> >    </xsd:schema>
> >    then the URI reference U#foo will be that datatype.
> >
> >    Implementations of OWL may choose to ignore the facets such a type.
> 
> Hmmm, we should co-ordinate with RDF Core and XML Schema WGs on this one.
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2002Nov/att-0092/02-index.ht
> ml#uris

If I expected RDF Core to make any progress on this issue, I would defer to
them. :-( 

[...]

peter

Received on Tuesday, 26 November 2002 11:51:27 UTC