RE: Where I am about floats, etc.

Hello,

I would just like to point out that OWL 1 explicitly required support of only strings and integers. Therefore, we should be able to
not include xsd:float into OWL 2 without breaking backwards compatibility. I'd therefore interpret "silent" as meaning "we don't
mention it in the list of the supported datatypes".

We might want to specify what a tool should do if it encounters a datatype that it doesn't support. I believe that the only correct
thing to do is to barf -- that is, to inform the user that the ontology contains an unsupported datatype and to refuse processing
the ontology.

Regards,

	Boris

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-owl-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-owl-wg-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Ivan Herman
> Sent: 07 July 2008 08:19
> To: Bijan Parsia
> Cc: OWL Working Group WG
> Subject: Re: Where I am about floats, etc.
> 
> 
> 
> Bijan Parsia wrote:
> 
> [skip]
> >
> > I think I'm specifically against including xsd:float and xsd:double as
> > types at all at this stage, and even as our specing them out as
> > optional. (We shouldn't forbid them; just be silent.)
> >
> 
> I know this is a side issue compared to the main thrust of the
> discussion but I would still like to understand what 'non including' and
> 'be silent' means in this case. What happens to legacy data?
> 
> My feeling is that being silent is not really possible. We should
> specify what happens if a tool gets an ontology/data that is perfectly
> o.k. in OWL2 DL or OWL2 EL++ but using, say, xsd:float (or other, non
> included XSD datatypes, for that matter): should we rule that the data
> is still o.k. in terms of, say, OWL2 EL++ with an additional warning
> that the reasoning on datatypes might be shaky, or would that data ruled
> to be incorrect and state it it OWL Full? I think something has to be
> said in the specification somewhere.
> 
> Personally, I would opt for the former, b.t.w., I suspect that there are
> already a bunch of OWL1 DL data out there and we would not want to
> refuse them from a DL point of view...
> 
> Bijan, how does Pellet treat such cases? I guess you have met this issue
> in practice...
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Ivan
> 
> --
> 
> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
> PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf

Received on Monday, 7 July 2008 08:19:22 UTC