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

Re: datatypes decision not carried out in specs?!?

From: Guus Schreiber <schreiber@cs.vu.nl>
Date: Thu, 08 May 2003 13:54:30 +0200
Message-ID: <3EBA4576.4060903@cs.vu.nl>
To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
CC: www-webont-wg@w3.org

Dan Connolly wrote:
> I have this action from 20Mar
>   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Mar/0132.html
> 
> to get review by the I18N WG of what we decided; basically,
> from this 13Mar message
>   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Mar/0087.html
> 
> [[[
> 1/ I propose that an OWL reasoner may choose not to support some of the
> OWL
>    built-in datatypes or even rdf:XMLLiteral, but that it should be easy to
>    determine which datatypes any OWL reasoner supports.
> 
> 2/ I propose that all OWL reasoners be required to support the following
>    TWO datatypes:
> 
> 	xsd:integer
> 	xsd:string
> ]]]
> 
> and I'm trying to find the parts of our spec where that decision
> is reflected so I can get it reviewed.
> 
> Well, our specs don't reflect it very clearly.
> 
> 
> Guide doesn't reflect it at all:
> 
> 
> [[[
> 
> The following datatypes are recommended for use with OWL: 
> 
> xsd:string
> xsd:normalizedString
> xsd:boolean
> xsd:decimal
> xsd:float
> xsd:double
> xsd:integer
> xsd:nonNegativeInteger
> xsd:positiveInteger
> xsd:nonPositiveInteger
> xsd:negativeInteger
> xsd:long
> xsd:int
> xsd:short
> xsd:byte
> xsd:unsignedLong
> xsd:unsignedInt
> xsd:unsignedShort
> xsd:unsignedByte
> xsd:hexBinary
> xsd:base64Binary
> xsd:dateTime
> xsd:time
> xsd:date
> xsd:gYearMonth
> xsd:gYear
> xsd:gMonthDay
> xsd:gDay
> xsd:gMonth
> xsd:anyURI
> xsd:token
> xsd:language
> xsd:NMTOKEN
> xsd:Name
> xsd:NCName
> ]]]
>  -- http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#Datatypes1
> 
> nor reference:
> 
> 
> [[[
> 
> The following are the recommended simple built-in XML Schema datatypes
> for use in OWL ontologies: 
> 
>       * The primitive datatype xsd:string, plus the following datatypes
>         derived from xsd:strong: xsd:normalizedString, xsd:token,
>         xsd:language, xsd:NMTOKEN, xsd:Name,and xsd:NCName.
>       * The primitive datatype xsd:boolean.
>       * The primitive numerical datatypes xsd:decimal, xsd:float, and
>         xsd:double, plus all derived types of xsd:decimal (xsd:integer,
>         xsd:positiveInteger. xsd:nonPositiveInteger,
>         xsd:negativeInteger, xsd:nonNegativeInteger, xsd:long, xsd:int,
>         xsd:short, xsd:byte, xsd:unsignedLong, xsd:unsignedInt,
>         xsd:unsignedShort, xsd:unsignedByte)
>       * The primitive time-related datatypes: xsd:dateTime, xsd:time,
>         xsd:date, xsd:gYearMonth, xsd:gYear, xsd:gMonthDay, xsd:gDay,
>         and xsd:gMonth.
>       * The primitive datatypes xsd:hexBinary, xsd:base64Binary, and
>         xsd:anyURI.
> ]]]
>   -- http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/#Datatype

It is in Reference, see Sec. 6.3 Datatype Support

[[
Tools may vary in terms of support for datatype reasoning. As a minimum, 
tools should support datatype reasoning for the XML Schema datatypes 
xsd:string and xsd:integer. For unsupported datatypes, lexically 
identical literals should be considered equal, whereas lexically 
different literals would not be known to be either equal or unequal. 
Unrecognized datatypes should be treated in the same way as unsupported 
datatypes.
]]

I made two changes:

1. Changed "As a minimum, tools should .." to
    "As a minimum, tools must".

2. For reader convenience added a forward reference in intro of Sec. 6
    to this section 6.3:

See the changes in the editor's draft:
http://www.daml.org/2002/06/webont/owl-ref-proposed#Datatype

Guus

> semantics makes a one-sentence mention of it, *after* listing
> all the other types:
> 
> [[[
> The following XML Schema datatypes can be used in OWL by means of the
> XML Schema canonical URI reference for the datatype,
> http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#name, where name is the local name of
> the datatype:xsd:string, xsd:boolean, xsd:decimal, xsd:float,
> xsd:double, xsd:dateTime, xsd:time, xsd:date, xsd:gYearMonth, xsd:gYear,
> xsd:gMonthDay, xsd:gDay, xsd:gMonth, xsd:hexBinary, xsd:base64Binary,
> xsd:anyURI, xsd:normalizedString, xsd:token, xsd:language, xsd:NMTOKEN,
> xsd:Name, xsd:NCName, xsd:integer, xsd:nonPositiveInteger,
> xsd:negativeInteger, xsd:long, xsd:int, xsd:short, xsd:byte,
> xsd:nonNegativeInteger, xsd:unsignedLong, xsd:unsignedInt,
> xsd:unsignedShort, xsd:unsignedByte and xsd:positiveInteger. OWL also
> uses rdfs:Literal and can use rdf:XMLLiteral. OWL tools need only
> implement the datatypes xsd:integer and xsd:string.
> ]]]
>  --
> http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-semantics/syntax.html#owl_built_in_datatypes
> 
> What does "OWL tools" mean, anyway?
> 
> I don't see any relevant tests.
> 
> And as I mentioned, the issues list isn't up to date on this.
>   http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/webont-issues.html#I5.26-OWLDLSyntax
> 
> So we seemed to decide one thing, but we actually asked the
> community to review something else.
> 
> I'm not sure what to do here.
> 

-- 
NOTE: new affiliation per April 1, 2003

Free University Amsterdam, Computer Science
De Boelelaan 1081a, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Tel: +31 20 444 7739/7718
E-mail: schreiber@cs.vu.nl
Home page: http://www.cs.vu.nl/~guus/ [under construction]
Received on Thursday, 8 May 2003 07:54:34 GMT

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