- From: Michael Schneider <schneid@fzi.de>
- Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 23:01:15 +0100
- To: <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <0EF30CAA69519C4CB91D01481AEA06A07511F4@judith.fzi.de>
Hi! Peter F. Patel-Schneider answered to Evan Wallace: >> Boris' action ( documented in >http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Feb/0129. html) updated the text of >> the structural specification document to allow >datatypeRestrictions only on datatypes. I am uncomfortable >with this new >> constraint, although I understand this was decided at last >week's telecon (I was out sick). > >What would you prefer? > >The syntax restriction was put in to prevent constructs like: > > DatatypeRestriction(DataComplementOf(xsd:integer) > minExclusive "1"^^xsd:integer) > >whose meaning is, at best, unclear. W.r.t. ISSUE-95, I just wanted to bring up again the idea of (recursively) allowing DataRestrictionS on DataRestrictionS [10], which was based on a suggestion by Peter [20]. OWL authors would then be allowed to write expressions like: DatatypeRestriction( DatatypeRestriction( xsd:integer minInclusive "18"^^xsd:integer ) maxExclusive "65"^^xsd:integer ) This would be semantically identical to: DatatypeRestriction( xsd:integer minInclusive "18"^^xsd:integer maxExclusive "65"^^xsd:integer ) Considerations: --------------- * Usecases: This would allow the definition of named partial data ranges, which can be reused (I think that this is what Peter suggested in [20]). For example, the first example above could then be rewritten as: DatatypeRestriction( ex:Adult maxExclusive "65"^^xsd:integer ) where: ex:Adult := DatatypeRestriction( xsd:integer minInclusive "18"^^xsd:integer ) * Semantical aspects: There would be no changes in semantics in comparison to the current proposal by Boris [30]. A recursive expressions would just be syntactic sugar for the respective "flat" DatatypeRestriction on a datatype URIs. The mapping from recursive to flat expressions would be unique modulo facet order. * Computational aspects: A simple preprocessor stage could do the linear recursive expansion into a "flattened" DatatypeRestriction. Afterwards a reasoner, which only knows about flat DatatypeRestrictionS, can work on the result. Any comments? Michael [10] <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Feb/0033.html> [20] <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Feb/0031.html> [30] <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Feb/0129.html> -- Dipl.-Inform. Michael Schneider FZI Forschungszentrum Informatik Karlsruhe Abtl. Information Process Engineering (IPE) Tel : +49-721-9654-726 Fax : +49-721-9654-727 Email: Michael.Schneider@fzi.de Web : http://www.fzi.de/ipe/eng/mitarbeiter.php?id=555 FZI Forschungszentrum Informatik an der Universität Karlsruhe Haid-und-Neu-Str. 10-14, D-76131 Karlsruhe Tel.: +49-721-9654-0, Fax: +49-721-9654-959 Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts Az: 14-0563.1 Regierungspräsidium Karlsruhe Vorstand: Rüdiger Dillmann, Michael Flor, Jivka Ovtcharova, Rudi Studer Vorsitzender des Kuratoriums: Ministerialdirigent Günther Leßnerkraus
Received on Tuesday, 26 February 2008 22:01:35 UTC