- 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