W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webont-wg@w3.org > February 2003

Re: question: datatype reasoning?

From: Frank van Harmelen <Frank.van.Harmelen@cs.vu.nl>
Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2003 20:57:03 +0100
To: www-webont-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <81116264.1044478623@localhost>

Ian Horrocks wrote:

> As for as the question of completeness is concerned, I agree with Jim
> that demanding complete reasoning of this kind for all XMLS/RDF
> datatypes may be setting the bar impossibly high. I think we should
> allow implementors to support subsets of the the available
> datatypes. Maybe we should, as Jim suggests, specify some minimum set
> of datatypes that need to be supported. A reasoner could then claim
> completeness if it was complete *for the datatypes it
> supported*. Users would be able to choose a reasoner that supported
> the datatypes they needed in their application.

I think the last few sentences are a very good suggestion:
an OWL reasoner can claim to be complete w.r.t. a self-chosen set of 
datatypes. This has the benefit of (a) including data-type reasoning in the 
spec's of the reasoners, without (b) setting the bar impossibly high.

A variation of this option could be to demand support for a minimal set of 
datatypes (integers and strings were mentioned). I'm neutral on whether to do 
this or not.

To repeat a question by Jim: where would such a statement go in our docs?

Received on Wednesday, 5 February 2003 19:29:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:56:51 UTC