Re: Resolveability of owl:real and owl:rational

Hi Bijan,

Thanks that makes sense, altough I can see a bunch of different ways to 
solve some of the issues that you raise. Still tradeoffs, tradeoffs.

For owl:rational I saw it in this feature request in
https://github.com/RDFLib/rdflib/issues/953
As I didn't know there was an owl:rational. I first resolved IRI the iri 
and then I didn't see it. My first guess was then to write "hi 
owl:rational doesn't exist" before thinking to check the spec. This 
raised my curiosity.

Regards,
Jerven


On 2020-01-16 18:03, Bijan Parsia wrote:
> Because owl.owl has always been a mistake and one that caused real
> problems in deployment. (Eg people would think that they’d *have* to
> import it in order to use OWL which automatically made their documents
> OWL Full which would lead to tools rejecting their documents. Etc.
> There’s no positive use case.) I’d have deleted it if I could have
> (having redirects to real documentation would have been fine but not
> worth all that much.)
> 
> This doesn’t help with the history alas. I’d have to spot check, but
> if Owl.owl has other OWL 2 URLs then they probably omitted because
> their optional and owl:real isn’t intended to be implemented. They
> both were more conceptual and future looking rather than something we
> expected to get near term uptake in implantation.
> 
> If we ever get systematic about equations (see the linear
> (in)equalities document) then they’ll be essential.
> 
>> On Jan 16, 2020, at 10:25, Jerven Bolleman <jerven.bolleman@sib.swiss> 
>> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi Bijan,
>> 
>> Thanks for the quick answer. For my curiosity, why didn't you think 
>> making them resolvable was a good idea. Sorry to bother, but searching 
>> the mailinglist doesn't get me anywhere and now I am super curious.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Jerven
>> 
>>> On 1/16/20 10:58 AM, Bijan Parsia wrote:
>>> I don’t think it was an oversight per se. I certainly didn’t think 
>>> making them resolvable was a good idea.
>>>> On Jan 16, 2020, at 09:53, Jerven Tjalling Bolleman 
>>>> <Jerven.Bolleman@sib.swiss> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Dear OWL community,
>>>> 
>>>> I just noticed that the two new datatypes introduced into OWL2 real 
>>>> and rational are not resolvable.
>>>> 
>>>> i.e. www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#rational does not exist
>>>> 
>>>> Was this an oversight when updating that file during the OWL2 work?
>>>> The datatypes are mentioned in 
>>>> https://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-syntax/#Real_Numbers.2C_Decimal_Numbers.2C_and_Integers
>>>> 
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Jerven
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> Jerven Tjalling Bolleman
>>>> SIB | Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics
>>>> CMU - 1, rue Michel Servet - 1211 Geneva 4
>>>> t: +41 22 379 58 85 - f: +41 22 379 58 58
>>>> Jerven.Bolleman@sib.swiss - http://www.sib.swiss
>>>> 
>>>> 
>> 

-- 
Jerven Tjalling Bolleman
SIB | Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics
CMU - 1, rue Michel Servet - 1211 Geneva 4
t: +41 22 379 58 85 - f: +41 22 379 58 58
Jerven.Bolleman@sib.swiss - http://www.sib.swiss

Received on Thursday, 16 January 2020 19:53:14 UTC