- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 12:21:01 +0000
- To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- CC: public-owl-wg@w3.org
Thanks for the analysis. I am happy with the suggested resolution. Michael asked about what deprecation means. I suggest - no mapping rule from the functional syntax to owl:DataRange is given - a mapping rule the other way is specified A note is added indicating that it owl:DataRange is deprecated, it MAY be used where backward compatibility with OWL 1.0 systems is paramount, but rdfs:Datatype SHOULD be used in preference. Full treatment of DataRange is unchanged, (but maybe we will need comprehension principles for rdfs:Datatype ...) Jeremy Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: > From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com> > Subject: ISSUE-29 datarange and plain literals with language tags > Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 17:56:08 +0000 > >> I have just had a thought. >> >> Owl:DataRange is also used for sets of plain literals with language >> tags, as well as for sets of typed literals. >> >> I am unclear whether rdfs:Datatype can be used for sets of plain >> literals with language tags. >> >> Jeremy > > Should still work, as instances of rdfs:Dataype don't have to be RDF > datatypes. > > The semantic conditions and axiomatic triples wrt rdfs:Datatype are: > > 1/ If x is in ICEXT(I(rdfs:Datatype)) > then <x, I(rdfs:Literal)> is in IEXT(I(rdfs:subClassOf)) > > 2/ rdf:XMLLiteral rdf:type rdfs:Datatype . > rdfs:Datatype rdfs:subClassOf rdfs:Class . > > 3/ If <aaa,x> is in D (i.e., D is an RDF datatype) > then I(aaa) is in ICEXT(I(rdfs:Datatype)) > > The axiomatic triples in 2/ are unproblematic. > > The semantic rule 3/ talks about RDF datatypes, and thus doesn't matter, > as the dataranges are not RDF datatypes. > > The semantic rule 1/ says that instances of rdfs:Datatypes are > subclasses of rdfs:Literal so we do have to be careful. However, > rdfs:Literal contains ... wait for it ... all RDF literals, which, > includes ... wait for it again ... plain literals. > > So, saying that { "1" "3"@en } is an instance of rdfs:Datatype is > unproblematic. > > peter
Received on Thursday, 17 January 2008 12:21:24 UTC