- From: Pierre-Antoine Champin <pierre-antoine.champin@liris.cnrs.fr>
- Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2011 11:09:34 +0200
- To: Felix Sasaki <felix.sasaki@fh-potsdam.de>
- CC: "public-media-annotation@w3.org" <public-media-annotation@w3.org>
On 04/06/2011 09:35 AM, Felix Sasaki wrote: > This sounds good to me, so also a +1 like Florian in this thread. I > think it might be worthwhile to explain the issue in our spec, basically > use your text in this thread, so that users understand the rationale. of course; I'll try to make a full proposal by next telecon (in 2 weeks) > Out of curiosity: Do you know why OWL2-RL only supports the above date / > time related types? no idea :-/ (and it becomes even trickier, see other thread) > > Felix > > > > On the one hand, I'm afraid that this is only translating the problem > from the ontology to the data: if people publish data using a datatype > not supported by OWL2-QL, will their data be correctly processed by a > OWL2-QL inference engine?... > > On the other hand, this would *allow* people to use the correct datatype > if they want to, and/or to be compliant with OWL2-QL if they want to. > > pa > > [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema11-2/ > [2] > http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/REC-owl2-conformance-20091027/#XML_Schema_Datatypes > [3] > http://dev.w3.org/2008/video/mediaann/mediaont-api-1.0/mediaont-api-1.0.html#attributes-7 > [4] http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-profiles/#Entities_3 > > > > > Felix > > > > > > > > > > This hinders interoperability a tiny bit, but not as much as > inventing a > > day and an hour for media resources for which we only know the > year. > > > > pa > > > > > > > > To all, some general remarks and conclusions > > > > * as most metadata format are more permissive regarding dates than > > xsd:dateTime, I suggest we simply use rdfs:Literal for all our > date > > properties, and explain that it should be of the form > > YYYY[-MM[-DD[Thh[:mm[:ss[.fff]]]]]] > > > > > > >
Received on Wednesday, 6 April 2011 09:10:01 UTC