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

Re: proposed response to http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webont-comments/2003Apr/0029.html

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2003 10:14:48 +0100
Message-ID: <3EDF0A08.106@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
CC: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>, www-webont-wg@w3.org


I so no problem with the message before we get onto which datatypes are 
supported.

Looking at:


> Hmm...
> "Other built-in XML Schema datatypes may be used in OWL Full, but with
> caveats described in the OWL Semantics and Abstract Syntax
> documentation."
>   -- http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#Datatypes1
> 
> what caveats? Mike, can you narrow that link to S&AS down to
> a particular section?


I thought that this was true of OWL Lite and OWL DL as well
I am not sure we have ever discussed where user defined datatypes (with 
private agreement) can be used.
I believe that we reluctantly decided not to provide URIs for XML Schema 
user defined datatypes because it is not in our remit.

I am not sure we have adequate text on user defined datatypes because we 
lost heart somewhat since we do not have URIs.

Would it make sense for individual members of the WG to co-author a note 
(not a WG note) based on:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Nov/0265.html
part 4
[[
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.
]]

My understanding is that we already have deployment of that paragraph.


which I have not seen any arguments of substance against.

Jeremy
Received on Thursday, 5 June 2003 05:15:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:00 GMT