- From: Zhe Wu <alan.wu@oracle.com>
- Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 14:28:59 -0500
- To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- CC: Ian Horrocks <ian.horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk>, public-owl-wg@w3.org
Peter, Looks great to me! Thanks, Zhe Ian Horrocks wrote: > Looks fine to me (modulo missing link to diffs). > > Ian > > > On 24 Feb 2009, at 15:42, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: > >> [Draft Response for LC Comment 43b:] ZW2b >> >> Dear Zhe, >> >> Thank you for your message >> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2009Jan/0083.html >> on the OWL 2 Web Ontology Language last call drafts. >> >> Your message contains multiple sections, affecting more than one >> document, and will thus generate multiple replies. This response >> is for sections 4 and 8 about the datatypes in OWL 2 RL. >> >> We have adjusted the datatypes of OWL 2 RL to include those XML Schema >> datatypes that are derived from xsd:string and xsd:integer, including >> xsd:positiveInteger. These were excluded from OWL 2 RL because of a >> mistaken analogy with OWL 2 EL and OWL 2 QL, namely that intersection of >> value spaces must be either empty or infinite to maintain the desired >> properties of the profile. It turns out that this is not needed in OWL >> 2 RL to obtain its desired computational properties. As any OWL 2 RL >> tool has to process xsd: string and xsd:integer, the added >> implementation burden to support these datatypes is negligible. >> >> The situation with owl:rational and owl:real is different. The working >> group has received complaints that implementing >> these datatypes may require significant effort on top of a rule >> reasoner. Therefore owl:rational and owl:real have been removed from >> OWL 2 RL. This possibility was mentioned in Feature At Risk #2. >> >> The diffs for these changes can be found at >> ..... >> >> The working group notes that Oracle has also brought up concerns with >> the treatment of xsd:float and xsd:double. These two datatypes are not >> currently part of OWL 2 RL. If this situation changes the working >> group will communicate with you. >> >> Please acknowledge receipt of this email to >> <mailto:public-owl-comments@w3.org> (replying to this email should >> suffice). In your acknowledgment please let us know whether or not you >> are satisfied with the working group's response to your comment. >> >> Regards, >> Peter F. Patel-Schneider >> on behalf of the W3C OWL Working Group >> > >
Received on Monday, 2 March 2009 19:29:38 UTC