- From: Michael Smith <msmith@clarkparsia.com>
- Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 15:03:25 -0500
- To: public-owl-wg <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/issues/74 ACCEPTED: Use the xsd namespace for the facet names This item has been at the end of the agenda but not reached on several telecons. In the interest of discussion that moves toward resolution of the issue I'll re-iterate what I took as the pros and cons previously raised. + The semantics of the facets are defined by reference to the XSD specification and re-use of the XSD URIs is possible (see URI minting text at [1]) - Non-XSD datatypes may be standardized (e.g, [ISSUE-87]) and it is not clear that application of XSD facets to such datatypes is consistent with XML Schema WG's intentions - If additional, non-xsd, facets were standardized at some point in the future, they would likely use URIs that are not XSD URIs, and such heterogeneity in facet URIs is undesirable (at least by some) Please reply if there were additional pros / cons I missed. -- Mike Smith Clark & Parsia [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#built-in-datatypes [ISSUE-87] http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/issues/87
Received on Wednesday, 2 January 2008 20:03:43 UTC